Jet Blue teams w/Big Brother

[Dizel8]

NYRangers,

Appropos what we talked about, saw this on some news site.

"Delta Air Lines (DAL: news, chart, profile) initially worked with the TSA on the CAPPS II system but would not characterize its level of involvement."

I have a tendency to believe, based on this, that Delta probably worked with the TSA, perhaps more so than thought and that it could potentially be an even bigger story than jetBlue. Be interesting to see, if someone decided to truly follow up on it.

The first lawsuit against jetBlue has been filed, in SLC no less. Apparently, they are looking for compensatory and not punitive damages. Further, they stated that jetBlue was a good company.

While, as I have said earlier, jetBlue failed in maintaining their privacy policy, I wonder what compensation people would be looking for, money, a free ticket? Secondly, I think in order to be given this, one should have to prove, that one was affected by it.
I cannot condone what jetBlue did, I am however curious, how someone can show they were affected by it.

Passenger trust has been hurt and that alone is perhaps damaging enough. I think only lawyers would be enriched by this.

Perhaps I can sue for emotional trauma, due to telemarketers calling during dinner time, claiming it gave me an eating disorder

 

[NYRANGERS]

NYRangers,

Appropos what we talked about, saw this on some news site.

"Delta Air Lines (DAL: news, chart, profile) initially worked with the TSA on the CAPPS II system but would not characterize its level of involvement."

I have a tendency to believe, based on this, that Delta probably worked with the TSA, perhaps more so than thought and that it could potentially be an even bigger story than jetBlue. Be interesting to see, if someone decided to truly follow up on it.

The first lawsuit against jetBlue has been filed, in SLC no less. Apparently, they are looking for compensatory and not punitive damages. Further, they stated that jetBlue was a good company.

While, as I have said earlier, jetBlue failed in maintaining their privacy policy, I wonder what compensation people would be looking for, money, a free ticket? Secondly, I think in order to be given this, one should have to prove, that one was affected by it.
I cannot condone what jetBlue did, I am however curious, how someone can show they were affected by it.

Passenger trust has been hurt and that alone is perhaps damaging enough. I think only lawyers would be enriched by this.

Perhaps I can sue for emotional trauma, due to telemarketers calling during dinner time, claiming it gave me an eating disorder

I think the entire program will be investigated now that the FTC and other government agencies are investigating jetBlue. If Delta is found to have violated it's privacy policy.....then Delta( we )should expect the same reprisals jetBlue will expereince.

This is about a wrong that was commited. If airlines choose to participate in these kind of things, they need to let their customers know. Not say they won't and then do it anyway. If Delta is found to be in the wrong then we deserve the backlash.

I am against the deception, not the company.

As our favorite saying goes.......time will tell.

fly safe,

NYR

On a side note.....it's interesting that the lawyer says they are not looking for punitive damages. If a class action rules in favor of ticket refund, I would call that ENORMOUS punitive damage. 5 million itineraries anywhere from $100-$500 is a substantial ammount. Imagine refunds for Delta pax if the tables were turned. On a good summer day Delta carries over 300,000 pax. Scary.

 

[NYRANGERS]

Sorry to keep posting these articles. They just keep comming and I found this one to be off base (with regards to jetBlue)

JetBlue Probes Take Flight
Published in CBS News - Indexed on Sep 23, 2003 Relevance:
The company said it was motivated by patriotism and the memory of the Sept. 11 attacks. (CBS/AP) The upstart discount airline JetBlue is under federal investigation and the target of a passenger lawsuit for passing personal information on 1.1 million flyers to a Defense Department contractor. The contractor, Torch Concepts of Huntsville, Ala., produced a study, "Homeland Security: Airline Passenger Risk Assessment," that was purported to help the government improve military base security.




It appears again that jetBlue's defence, while seemingly noble and patriotic.......would be no different to Delta's case except........Delta was upfront about there willingness to participate with the program....America spoke and Delta withdrew. This is a very bad excuse on jetBlue's part. It is offensive to use such tragedy to squirm out of responsibility. This is shameful of your company, and may hurt as much as the actual case. New Yorkers (and others) will not tolerate this kind of excuse from corporate America.

 

[Dizel8]

It is indeed a scary thought and it could end up being very expensive. The question remins though, who should get awarded damages? Who has really been hurt? I am not sure the invasion of privacy is, in this case, really a valid damage. Now, if someone took pictures of you while you were in the shower and posted them on the net, I think one would have a serious case.

The question then becomes, what is privacy and when is it invaded. As we both know, companies trade your private information all the time, using them to do anything from credit cards to sending catalogues. Of course the great thing, is that the companies trade these in secret so to speak. Certainly, we can obtain some of the info going around DMV records, Credit scores and even medical records. In general it is a tedious process, but it can be done. Interestingly enough, some companies maintain records of your personal information, that you cannot obtain, hence one could not fin out what information they do have.

I hope this is a lesson learned for who ever authorized this, as it was done, in the interest of furthering safety, without malice intended.

 

[Dizel8]

Neither you nor I am privy to why it was done. I will certainly choose to believe, that it was done to enhance safety, something that certainly was highlighted as being a problem after 9/11.

Like you said, Delta withdrew form CAPPS, however, we will probably (hopefully) never know, what Delta did, the level of participation or the info discovered or released.

Perhaps, jetBlue case, will carry the torch so to speak, with respect to what America wants to do and how strongly we wish to protect our privacy.

I think, that eventually, we will have the CAPPS ll program and since it will be mandated to all airlines, it becomes a moot point.

 

[Snoopy58]

How do you determine "Compensatory"?

For the guy who bought a ticket on JB, paid his $X00, flew from point A to point B and back, and found out that his name & itinerary were turned over, what award will make him whole?

What was his "loss," and how much is it worth that he should be compensated? I'd submit that anything remotely close to the price of his ticket is far, far, far beyond what he lost there. I mean, he got his air travel! How much is his single itinerary worth, in a privacy context?

If he shreds or stores in a locked file cabinet EVERY credit card statement (they usually show partial itinerary), ticket stub, boarding pass, travel agency itinerary, and printout from ticketless travel, then he could perhaps make a claim, but people leave used boarding passes lying around all the time -- the privacy of the "data" on it (name + flight number + city pair) isn't worth very much to a lot of people, apparently.

If the lawsuit HAD asked for punative damages, I'd think JB would be in trouble. But it didn't. (Makes me wonder if it's almost a "friendly" lawsuit -- get everybody to join THIS class action before a really dangerous lawsuit gets going that could put them out of business with punative damages.)

What methodology might a judge/jury/attorney use to suggest what the appropriate dollar value would be for "compensation" in a case like this?

Any thoughts?

 

[Dizel8]

Well, I am afraid that there will be more lawsuits and worse yet, that people will seek punitive damages. We may have people becoming "opportunistic" here and decide that their privacy was invaded to the tune of 100k.

All it takes is some good lawyers and a jury that wants to punish "big business". We know people are fed up with telemarketing, spam, popups etc. Lot of pent up frustration.

As someone said, it is not whether someone was actually truly harmed by this, but whether or not they can convince judge and jury that they "were" harmed.

 

[NYRANGERS]

I guess it was bound to happen

Cauley Geller Announces Class Action Lawsuit Against JetBlue Airways Corporation in Connection With the Illegal Disclosure of Personal Information Concerning Its Passengers
September 24, 2003 4:04:00 PM ET


NEW YORK, Sept. 24 /PRNewswire/ -- The Law Firm of Cauley Geller Bowman & Rudman, LLP announced today that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on behalf of all persons who have had personal and private information about them unlawfully gathered and transmitted to third parties by JetBlue Airways Corporation JBLU ("JetBlue"). A copy of the complaint filed in this action is available from the Court, or can be viewed on the firm's website at http://www.cauleygeller.com .

The complaint charges JetBlue with violating the Federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act, state unfair business practice statutes, as well as invasion of privacy. More specifically, the complaint alleges, among other things, that JetBlue disregarded the privacy policy posted on its website regarding the collection and use of personal information concerning its customers when it sold private and confidential information to third parties concerning more than 1.5 million of its customers. The Complaint seeks, among other things, for each Class Member: (i) at least $1,000 in statutory damages for JetBlue's illegal use of stored electronic communications; (ii) the greater of $10,000 or $100 a day for each of JetBlue's illegal interception of electronic communications; and (iii) other actual, statutory and punitive damages. In addition, the Complaint seeks an order: (i) enjoining JetBlue from continuing its illegal actions; (ii) requiring JetBlue to conduct a corrective information campaign advising consumers whose confidential data has already been disclosed how to prevent further unwanted intrusions; and (iii) requiring the destruction and purging of all personal confidential information collected or shared as a result of JetBlue's illegal conduct.

If you have any questions about this lawsuit, you are encouraged to call or e-mail the Firm or visit the Firm's website at http://www.cauleygeller.com .

Cauley Geller is a national law firm that is one of the country's premiere firms that practices in the area of class action litigation, with in-house finance and forensic investigative specialists and extensive trial experience. Since its founding, Cauley Geller has recovered billions of dollars on behalf of aggrieved class members. The firm maintains offices in Boca Raton, Little Rock and New York.

Contact:

CAULEY GELLER BOWMAN & RUDMAN, LLP

Robert M. Rothman, Esq. or Samuel H. Rudman, Esq.

Client Relations Department:
Jackie Addison or Heather Gann
P.O. Box 25438
Little Rock, AR 72221-5438
Toll Free: 1-888-551-9944
Fax: 1-501-312-8505
E-mail: [email protected]
© 2003 PRNewswire

 

[Skank]

Nice job NY Rangers, now you are serving as the barker for an ambulance chasing law firm. Had any other interesting jobs, or is this just a "public service" you are performing?

 

[AAflyer]

If JetBlue were not making money and sucking wind like many of the majors I don't think anyone would care. If this happened at AA, UAL, DAL,NWA people would almost expect it. Ironic.

If it happened under the SAME reasons at AA you could be darn sure I would defend AA with everything I had!!

I think many are hoping JB bites the dust, so they could say " I told you so", and that is a sad, sad, sad thing.

If that is worst anyone has to dig up or spread all over the media then the boys in blue are doing all right!!

Hang in there guys, it is called growing pains, however the way you re-direct will show how proefessional you really are.

Still A-OK in my book.

AA

P.S. thanks for the many rides to ROC.

 

[NYRANGERS]

Nice job NY Rangers, now you are serving as the barker for an ambulance chasing law firm. Had any other interesting jobs, or is this just a "public service" you are performing?

I'm sorry you don't like the article. However it has some relevance to the thread subject. I think the lawsuit is a little rediculous and I don't expect it go very far. I just made a prediction a little while back that some law firm would take up this as a class action with big dollars in their eyes. Not in the name of "protecting" passengers rights. These guys specialize in class action suits, so it was to be expected. I don't think you have much to worry about, it's was just an interesting development.

I think the hiring of D@T was a good step for JB and admission of a mistake and saying they won't do it again will be enough for the FTC. I would also expect a class action to be thrown out.

If you don't like the subject, take issue with the moderators and try to get them to delete the thread. But if you like you can accost me for jetBlue's problems. I don't care.

Try not to worry so much. Enjoy the flying,

NYR

 

[UpNDownGuy]

I was all set to dismiss this as an attempt to extort money out of JetBlue...then I remembered I flew JB earlier this year. AND I bought the ticket online with a credit card...Now I'm pissed! Uncle Sugar digs into my life enough, thank you very much! I don't need some airline to volunteer more information for me.

 

[Dizel8]

So, you are mostly down, but now hoping to go up

 

[Blue Dude]

UpNDown, you weren't affected. It was a one-time shot, a year ago. No financial info was given. Only itinerary, name, address, phone number. And the info was given to a contractor, not the Federal Government. That doesn't make it right, but I think you're mistakenly upset if you're upset for the reasons you stated.

 

[Intruder One]

Well..Well..Well..I lived to see the day.........JetBlue finally made a mistake.I especially liked the coverage on CNN.

 

[Michael Knight]

Actual Press Release

-- Airline Confirms it will Not be a Test Airline for CAPPS II --
New York, NY (September 22, 2003) – JetBlue Airways (Nasdaq: JBLU) has retained Deloitte & Touche to assist the airline in its analysis and continued development of its privacy policy following the airline's release of customer data to Torch Concepts, a contractor for the Department of Defense, for a project concerning military base security.

At the special request of the Department of Defense, the airline shared passenger itineraries but did not provide payment or credit card information to Torch Concepts. "The information given to Torch contained name, address and phone number, along with flight information, but absolutely no payment or credit card information," said David Neeleman, CEO of JetBlue Airways. "While this is a concern, we want to let our customers know that we are fully committed to their privacy and are working with the assistance of Deloitte & Touche to further develop our internal processes and procedures to address the protection of personally identifiable customer information."

Torch's outside legal counsel has confirmed to JetBlue that no identifiable customer data was released to any third party, including the Department of Defense or the Transportation Security Administration, and that all the data has been destroyed. JetBlue does not sell customer information to any third parties and the airline received no payment from Torch.

The airline also confirms that it will not be a test airline nor has it ever shared customer information for the TSA's CAPPS II program and will not do so unless required by law. While, in the interests of the safety and security of its customers, JetBlue had entered into discussions with the TSA regarding the CAPPS II program and had agreed initially to participate in its development, the airline decided against further participation unless federally mandated due to concerns for customer privacy and the uncertainty of the final structure of CAPPS II.

"We support the TSA and the important work they do to ensure the safety and security of all airline passengers but we decided not to be involved in CAPPS II testing given the unresolved issues regarding privacy protection," said David Neeleman, CEO of JetBlue Airways. "Along with other airlines, we look forward to continuing our partnership with the TSA to improve airline security while being respectful of customer privacy concerns."

JetBlue is a low-fare, low-cost passenger airline, which provides high-quality customer service. JetBlue operates a fleet of 47 new Airbus A320 aircraft and is scheduled to place into service another six A320s by the end of 2003. The airline recently placed an order for 100 EMBRAER 190 aircraft with options for an additional 100. The first EMBRAER 190 is scheduled to be delivered in mid 2005. All JetBlue aircraft feature roomy all-leather seats each equipped with free live satellite television, offering up to 24 channels of DIRECTV® Programming at every seat.*

Based out of New York City's John F. Kennedy International Airport, JetBlue currently operates 184 flights a day and serves 22 destinations in 11 states and Puerto Rico. With JetBlue, all seats are assigned, all travel is ticketless, all fares are one-way, and a Saturday night stay is never required. For more information, schedules and fares, please visit www.jetblue.com or call JetBlue reservations at 1-800-JETBLUE (538-2583). This press release, as well as past press releases, can be found on www.jetblue.com.

*DIRECTV® service is not available on flights between New York City and San Juan, Puerto Rico.

This press release contains statements of a forward-looking nature which represent our management's beliefs and assumptions concerning future events. Forward-looking statements involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions and are based on information currently available to us. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements due to many factors, including without limitation, potential hostilities in the Middle East or other regions, our ability to implement our growth strategy and our dependence on the New York market, our fixed obligations and our limited operating history, seasonal fluctuations in our operating results, increases in maintenance costs, fuel prices and interest rates, our competitive environment, our reliance on sole suppliers, government regulation, our failure to properly integrate LiveTV or enforce its patents, our ability to hire qualified personnel, the loss of key personnel and potential problems with our workforce including work stoppages, and continuing changes in the airline industry following the September 11th terrorist attacks and the increased risk of future attacks, as well as potential risks with the delivery, placing into service and integration into our operations of the EMBRAER 190 aircraft. Additional information concerning these and other factors is contained in the Company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings, including but not limited to, the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that may arise after the date of this release.

 

[Skygod]

Get Real!

http://slate.msn.com/id/2088862/

Lay Off JetBlue
A "serious betrayal" of consumer privacy? Get real.
By Timothy Noah
Posted Wednesday, September 24, 2003, at 4:00 PM PT on Slate.com


Why all the hysteria about JetBlue? On Sept. 16, Wired News broke the story that the discount airline had shared old passenger itineraries with a government contractor seeking to improve the screening of airline passengers. It had received the tip from Paul Weyrich, the cultish chairman of the far-right Free Congress Foundation. Weyrich, who's very interested in privacy issues, had learned about JetBlue's actions from "a very high-level official at the Transportation Security Administration." Wired News ran with it. The AP picked up the story, erroneously attributing the scoop to privacy advocate Bill Scannell. (Wired News made it perfectly plain that Weyrich was its original source. Scannell was cited merely as a confirming source. Was AP simply embarrassed to state the story's real provenance?) The following day, the story landed with a thud on Page One of the New York Times, whose editorial page was soon declaring it "one of the most serious betrayals of consumers' privacy rights by an American business." Now lawsuits are being filed, a formal complaint is being lodged with the Federal Trade Commission, and JetBlue's CEO, David Neeleman, is begging its customers' forgiveness.

Forgiveness for what? As a general rule, airline passengers do not reveal their darkest, most intimate secrets when they book a flight. The information JetBlue gave the contractor, Torch Concepts, consisted of names, addresses, phone numbers, and itineraries. Admittedly, JetBlue did violate is own privacy policy, which states, "The financial and personal information collected on this site is not shared with any third parties." This minor act of corporate malfeasance would have made a nice little story for Airways magazine. But Chatterbox can't see what makes it a major national story.

After Torch Concepts got its hands on JetBlue's names, addresses, phone numbers, and itineraries, it matched some of these up with data it purchased elsewhere. Apparently this included Social Security numbers and financial data. Much concern has been raised that this constituted government snooping into the lives of innocent Americans. (Torch Concepts never actually turned its data over to the TSA, but the TSA put Torch Concepts in touch with JetBlue and clearly hoped the result would be a usable prototype for the TSA's airline screening in the future.) But the government already has financial data—in most cases, of much better quality—on everybody who pays income tax. It knows your Social Security number, too. It gave you your Social Security number.

The purpose of JetBlue's collaboration with Torch Concepts was to compile profiling data on airline passengers. Torch Concepts' strategy was to look for suspicious "transportation transactions," "investment transactions," and "biochemical transactions." Given the reality of 9/11, some kind of profiling is going to occur. Whether these particular benchmarks will prove reliable is anybody's guess. But almost anything would be an improvement on the current system, which relies heavily on unacknowledged racial profiling of Arabs and the escalating removal of clothing at the metal detectors. (For casual voyeurs, airports are now almost as much fun to visit as public beaches.)

So, where's the concrete harm? "It's really quite unclear what the damages are," says Solveig Singleton, a senior analyst at the libertarian Competitiveness Enterprise Institute. Singleton is a frequent critic of privacy advocates, but on this point, privacy advocate Marcia Hofmann, staff counsel at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, agrees. "When you're dealing with privacy law, it's always a problem trying to define how someone was injured," she told Chatterbox. When pressed, Hofmann cited the hypothetical risk of identity theft. Surely, though, the data most helpful to identity thieves is what's available publicly, not what some government agency keeps private for law enforcement.

There was one troubling instance where Torch Concepts put information it compiled on one individual (including the Social Security number, but minus the name) on the Web, as a sample of what it can do. In the Sept. 24 Wall Street Journal, Torch said that information has now been destroyed. That isn't true. Chatterbox clicked onto the data just today. Want to guess how Chatterbox found it? Through a document posted by the privacy-obsessed Electronic Privacy Information Center!

Here's a little personal information about Chatterbox: Last month, on the recommendation of the Chattersister, he booked a flight to Los Angeles with the Chatterkinder on JetBlue. Circumstances required him to change the flight fairly close to the departure date. It was a complicated transaction that involved removing Chatterbox from the return flight and substituting Mammy Chatterbox. The JetBlue agent with whom Chatterbox spoke was unfailingly competent and kind in making these changes, which occasioned a minimal additional charge.

When Chatterbox and the Chatterkinder walked onto the plane, the overhead racks were spewing what appeared to be smoke. That was momentarily alarming. But it turned out to be condensation! It was a very humid day, and someone had made the improbable decision to crank up the air conditioning to make the passengers more comfortable! The plane itself was brand-new, with leather seats, legroom far exceeding anything Chatterbox had ever encountered in coach, individualized DirectTV for every passenger, and a little card tucked behind the barf bag recommending yoga positions to ease muscle strain during the flight, which took off and arrived on time. All the more remarkable was that these luxuries were available on a discount airline. In sum, this commercial flight was a pleasurable consumer experience. When's the last time you saw the words "commercial flight" and "pleasurable" in the same sentence? (No, Chatterbox doesn't own any JetBlue stock, or know anyone who works for the company.)

So, they made a trivial goof enforcing their privacy policy. They don't need to apologize to Chatterbox, who looks forward to his next flight on JetBlue.