Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts Government Your Rights Online News

Northwest Sued for Divulging Customer Information 22

Posted by timothy
from the no-doubt dept.
ChazeFroy writes "Northwest Airlines is now being sued for giving customer information to the government. The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in US District Court in St. Paul MN, contends that the airline violated its own privacy policy as well as federal and state laws."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Northwest Sued for Divulging Customer Information

Comments Filter:
  • by rf600r (236081)
    I'm sure that Northwest will find some way to get the state of MN to pay for all the legal fees here, anyway. NW is a taxpayer supported company in Minnesota. They thank the fine citizens of that state by price gouging them.
  • by sfjoe (470510) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @12:41PM (#8044623)


    Oh great. Another frivoulous lawsuit. Don't these ambulance-chaser lawyers realize that the federal government will protect our privacy? These lawsuits just add to the cost of doing business. We must crack down hard on these frivoulous lawsuits by getting some real tort reform. After all, Northwest Airlines has the best interests of their customers in mind and can't really be expected to keep customer data private when there are profits to be made.
    Of all the nerve!
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Inside the United States, where the war began, we must continue to give our homeland security and law enforcement personnel every tool they need to defend us. And one of those essential tools is the Patriot Act, which allows federal law enforcement to better share information, to track terrorists, to disrupt their cells, and to seize their assets. For years, we have used similar provisions to catch embezzlers and drug traffickers. If these methods are good for hunting criminals, they are even more important
    • by wolf- (54587) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @01:53PM (#8045857) Homepage
      Key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year. (Democratic Applause.) The terrorist threat will not expire on that schedule. (Republican Applause.) Our law enforcement needs this vital legislation to protect our citizens. You need to renew the Patriot Act. (Republican Applause.)

      Clarifications in bold
    • by orthogonal (588627) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @02:08PM (#8046069) Journal
      ...Key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year. (Applause.) The terrorist threat will not expire on that schedule. (Applause.)....

      The AC, of course, is quoting President Bush's State of the Union Speech given last night.

      The applause for "Key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year" was predominantly by the Democrats, and was apparently unexpected by the Republicans.

      To repudiate the Democrats, the Republicans rose to their feet and even more loudly applauded "The terrorist threat will not expire on that schedule."

      Yes, that's right. The Republican majority clapped loudly and enthusiastically for the proposition that the terrorist threat won't end.

      But besides being black humor at its best, it just makes sense: the continuing "War on Terrorism" gives the Republicans an excuse to grab more power, further limit our liberties, and direct more no-bid contracts to Halliburton. Our fear of terrorism is their ticket to the good life.

      So it was telling that later in the speech, President Bush characterized the "War on Terrorism" as "a task that does not end."

      Like the "War on Drugs", Bush knows he'll never win the "War on Terrorism", and so he'll always have it around to justify more and more intrusive government. So long as there's a "War on Terrorism", Bush and his Republican cronies get to keep their cushy jobs, old men like Admiral Poindexter get to stare into your bedrooms, and young men from poor families get to join the army and die for Halliburton's oil.


      • The applause for "Key provisions of the Patriot Act are set to expire next year" was predominantly by the Democrats

        You mean the same Democrats that voted for it??

        "The Patriot Act: One Step Closer to a Police State?" [thenorthstarnetwork.com]:

        H.R. 3162 was passed on Roll Call 398 in the House of Representatives on October 24 by a vote of 357 in favor, 66 against and 9 members not voting. The partisan split was 211 Republicans voting in favor, 3 casting no votes and 5 not voting. There were 145 Democrats supporting the bill, 62
  • How Ironic! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gillbates (106458) on Wednesday January 21, 2004 @12:54PM (#8044790) Homepage Journal

    The information they divulged was divulged to a researcher at NASA. Though I don't have the URL, I remember reading that the researcher basically concluded that airline passenger data could not be used to predict terrorist events; that the so-called passenger profiling efforts were effectively worthless. In other words, you couldn't reliably pick out terrorists based on statistical analyses of passenger flight records.

    How ironic that Northwest is getting sued for something which didn't even achieve its intended result!

  • Right after 9/11 terrorists were suspected of buying put options on airline stocks. What type of stock market transaction profiling took place and by whom?
  • Well, there goes ANOTHER airline I WON'T be flying ever again!

    Wonder how many other airlines are just that much better at hiding their complicity...

The major difference between bonds and bond traders is that the bonds will eventually mature.

Working...