Court Demands American Airlines List Its Flights On Orbitz 93
schwit1 writes "American Airlines, which removed its flights from Orbitz.com late last year, was ordered by a Chicago court on Thursday to allow the travel site access to its flight and fare information. American Airlines filed an anti-trust suit against Travelport in December, claiming that the company, which owns just under half of Orbitz's shares and runs the service compiling fare information for travel site, was trying to control the sale of tickets. Before the lawsuit, a considerable amount of American's revenue had been coming from tickets booked through Orbitz and Travelport."
Am I missing something? (Score:4, Insightful)
Useless Article - Court Reasoning Not Explained (Score:5, Insightful)
I hate reading press accounts of court decisions that provide no useful information on what exactly the court was ruling on or how it reached its decision. Without this information, we have no idea if this decision was as broad as whether all airlines must list with central clearing houses (and why), as short-term / technical as over a paperwork error resulting in a temporary win for Orbitz until corrected by AA, or about something else altogether (ie there was a previously agreed to contract between the two companies that was still valid and that AA was trying to terminate early without sufficient justification.)
To be sure wait until the court decision is linked before forming any opinions, or at the very least until an article presents a credible explanation of what the issue being litigated is and how the court ruled on it.
Re:Free Trade? (Score:3, Insightful)
There's absolutely no such thing as a Free Market. There is, by extension, no such thing as Free Trade either.
Can't I sell my goods and services where I want?
Yes, but within the law (well, technically you also can at least try outside of the law, but that's a different matter).
Now, in some sort of hypothetical anarchist/libertarian nation, you will find that without governments to enforce their law, cartels and mobs and the like will rise and enforce their laws.
At least with proper democratic governments, the laws are more subject to the will of the governed. Maybe not so much these days (and really, maybe not even in the olden days), but it's still better than having the laws set by kings, warlords, and mob bosses.
But either way, you still never end up with a Free Market or Free Trade.
Yes, the customer pays indirectly, but that still (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Free Trade? (Score:5, Insightful)
There's absolutely no such thing as a Free Market. There is, by extension, no such thing as Free Trade either.
True- in the real world there probably can never be absolutely free markets or trade. And by your logic there's no such thing as free speech or equality under the law, but just because we can't actually have them doesn't mean that they can't be ideals that we strive to emulate or guidelines for our legal system. In the same way I'll never manage to be perfectly honest or rational, but that doesn't mean that I can't attempt to avoid lying or try to overcome my biases.
At least with proper democratic governments, the laws are more subject to the will of the governed. ... it's still better than having the laws set by kings, warlords, and mob bosses.
Right - there will always be the organized use of force in the world, but as you pointed out some methods of organization are preferable to others. As part of the governed, I summarize my preference for regulations to be few over many, necessary over unnecessary, clear over vague, evenly over unevenly applied, etc as "I am generally in favor of free markets". I think that can be just as clear as your preference for democracy.
Re:Yes, the customer pays indirectly, but that sti (Score:3, Insightful)
As a consumer I am paying for the quick comparison.
If AA wants to charge less through their own site, then maybe I will check it, but almost always it's cheaper and easier to book through orbitz or travelocity (not always though, and the through the airline tickets are usually easier to reschedule).
The airlines get enough government help that I don't really mind them being forced to let me comparison shop.
Re:airline hosed by judge. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Free Trade? (Score:4, Insightful)
There's absolutely no such thing as a Free Market. There is, by extension, no such thing as Free Trade either.
But if the only laws the government makes are to prevent cartels and mobs, but no other law, isn't there then a "Free Market"?
Absolutely not. I do agree that the government should work to prevent cartels and mobs, as well as minimizing the impact the government has on a market, but any laws whatsoever, by definition, are not a free market.
That's the fundamental flaw of the libertarians. I agree a lot with their end desires, but they pretend to be ideologically pure. But reality is their ideals can never be achieved. If you believe you can be ideologically pure, you try to enforce an impossible policy. That can never end well.
Re:Free Trade? (Score:4, Insightful)
I agree that "free trade" should be an ideal, but it should also be understood that it is impossible to ever achieve. The problem arises when people think that anything less than "free trade" is immoral. What that really means is that morality is impossible. That's the fundamental flaw with the Randists and the libertarians.
Re:Free Trade? (Score:5, Insightful)
Libertarians believe in necessary regulation. Those which don't simply don't know they aren't libertarians but anarchists. We DO have names for these things; you are hereby invited to use the proper ones.