David Lee
FORT WORTH, Texas (CN) — American Airlines told jurors Monday that a travel website behind the controversial “skiplagging” hack is freeloading off of the airline’s good name in allowing passengers to book cheaper tickets to a connecting city and then abandoning the subsequent flight on the ticket.
American sued New York-based travel website Skiplagged last year in Fort Worth federal court. The Fort Worth-based airline claims Skiplagged’s “classic bait and switch” promotion of the hack breaks the airline’s policies, infringes on American’s trademarks, risks customers having their airfare voided and constitutes tortious interference.
“Find flights the airlines don’t want you to see,” Skiplagged’s homepage stated Monday. “We’re exposing loopholes in airfare pricing to save you money.”
Otherwise known as “hidden city” ticketing, skiplagging involves booking a ticket containing a connecting flight to a destination city, but the traveler leaves the airport on layover at the connecting city and never boards the onward flight. A traveler may be tempted to do this when a direct ticket to the connecting city is more expensive than a ticket with an onward flight to a different final destination.
Skiplagging is not illegal, but airlines view it as a policy violation that is grounds for termination of a traveler’s entire itinerary due to not being able to sell the empty seat in the onward flight.
Paul Yetter, an attorney for American with Yetter Coleman in Houston, told jurors during opening statements that Skiplagged is not an authorized agent of the airline yet “dresses up” its website with American’s trademarks to look legitimate and fool consumers into thinking they are buying from the airline.
“Skiplagged says it is like Expedia, but it offers no real service,” Yetter said. “If a customer complains, Skiplagged shrugs it’s shoulders.”
Yetter pointed to language purportedly from Skiplagged that refers customers to call American’s toll-free numbers — not a phone number for Skiplagged — for questions about their reservation.
Legacy airlines that operate under a hub-and-spoke system will be susceptible to skiplagging due to the necessity of connecting flights to their business model. Budget airlines that work under a more point-to-point system will be less exposed due to having more direct flights.
The airline claims Skiplagged simply purchases the tickets on American’s website while pretending to be the customer, then tells customers to hide it from the airline.
“But many of the fares displayed on Skiplagged’s website are higher than what the consumer would pay if they simply booked a ticket on American’s website of through an actual authorized agent of American,” the 37-page complaint says. “It is the classic bait and switch: draw consumers in with the promise of secret fares, and instead sell the consumer a ticket at a higher price.”
Yetter told jurors Skiplagged has made over $90 million deceiving customers using American’s brand without permission, while American has lost millions from the resulting lost ticket sales.
The airline claims Skiplagged usually charges a $10 fee per one-way ticket, but sometimes the fee is 10 percent of the base fare.
Defense attorney Aaron Tobin, with Condon Tobin in Dallas, told jurors his client charges flyers $35 at most for its services. He pushed back against claims Skiplagged is a freeloader, stating the cheaper fare information on the site is free to use for customers to book on their own elsewhere.
Tobin described how Skiplagged initially was a free website that sought to provide more complete fare information for flyers, and how founder Aktarer Zaman, 31, quit his job as a software engineer at Amazon to focus on Skiplagged as it grew.
“This case is simply about freedom of choice,” Tobin said. “Even choices that big powerful airlines don’t want you to see, choices that they created.”
American reportedly removed a 17-year-old from a flight last year and banned him for three years when he tried to fly from Gainesville, Florida, to Charlotte, North Carolina, on a ticket with a final destination of New York City. The ticket was supposedly cheaper than booking just a flight to Charlotte.
This is not the first time Skiplagged has been sued. United Airlines and online travel agency Orbitz sued in federal court 10 years ago, citing “logistical and public safety concerns” with skiplagging.
“When consumers purchase a flight through United, they agree to be bound by United prohibition against ‘hidden city’ ticketing,” the 2014 complaint states. Skiplagged later settled with Orbitz, while United’s claims were dismissed.
Tobin told jurors United’s lawsuit backfired on the airline; that it ended up driving more traffic to Skiplagged. He accused American of first discussing Skiplagged internally eight years ago and implied it waited this long to sue because the airline is more concerned about the “hidden” fares than protecting its trademark.
American is seeking over $94 million in damages. The trial is expected to last one to two weeks before U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman.
link