Just a little bit more of my legal half-knowledge -

Ethically, this thread seems to side with the Hotel and, legally, believe it or not, ethics comes into play as well because, so often, as in this case, intent is an issue.

For example, I personally never would have noticed this "deal" because I have seen it so frequently when I pass over internet promos or ebay offerings that say hotels are free, and then on the next page, if one pays the airfare or v.v. They end up being no-deals if one reads on, as they are instructed to do.

There are many questions here with regards to intent. Were the rooms bought from such a promo or ad, such a place that one may usually find $0 as a price? And, if so, where was the rest of the no-deal one expects to find? Or were they had directly from a travel website or the airline's site itself, where it is certainly not common to find a rate for $0.

Also, what about the airline's intent. What if this was a marketing ploy albeit really, really backhanded, although look at PremEx's post where he states he feels sorry for them. Hey, you can't help it. I do too! Or, did the hotel know this could happen and just let it go?

On a legal level, this could go on forever. I would just like to see the lawyer that wants to go back and forth with Hilton's lawyers. But then again, they would probably settle to reduce costs and notoriety ... and, in the meantime, the lawyer could get some press ...