UA sues passenger complaint website (2012)
Nov 30, 2012, 1:34 am
#61
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Programs: Continental OnePass Platinum
Posts: 416
I'm a bit surprised at some of the attitudes on this forum towards the gentleman running untied.com, criticizing him for being vindictive and wasting 16 years of his life.
Look, everyone does what they have to do to get through the day and get excited about waking up tomorrow. If you watch an hour of TV a day, or root for a football team, or if you get on a plane to fly 18 hours just to collect miles to make 1K, or post 2,000 times to FlyerTalk per year... those are all worthless activities in the grand scheme of things... but you enjoy them. Who are you to criticize him for his hobby?
Look, everyone does what they have to do to get through the day and get excited about waking up tomorrow. If you watch an hour of TV a day, or root for a football team, or if you get on a plane to fly 18 hours just to collect miles to make 1K, or post 2,000 times to FlyerTalk per year... those are all worthless activities in the grand scheme of things... but you enjoy them. Who are you to criticize him for his hobby?
Nov 30, 2012, 4:30 am
#62
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,919
? would the fact that they have let him be for 16 YEARS purhaps play a roll? I mean in all honesty they did profit from it too since they did not have to deal with all the petty stuff themselves. That costs companies a lot of money too.
The big nit picks that have led to fines well excuse me but it doesn't matter who you are in the real world if you mess up, be that accidently or deliberately and you are caught - you face the punishment. The FAA or any other controlling body doesn't go about handing out fines because they are having a bad hair day but rather because they are able to proof some sort of non conformity on the behalf, of in this case, United.
As far as publishing contact details - well isn't United a publicly traded company? I fail to see why anyones business contact details should be deemed "private". There is no such thing in business life. beside how did he get those details? I sure he didn't have to hack anything to get them. I am sure these people in question also have business cards that they give out. I fail to see where that can be deemed a secret.
The look alike of the deign is the ONLY place I would see a problem but then again they don't want him to shut down - I wonder why? Guess what then they would have to deal with all the petty stuff tooo.
The big nit picks that have led to fines well excuse me but it doesn't matter who you are in the real world if you mess up, be that accidently or deliberately and you are caught - you face the punishment. The FAA or any other controlling body doesn't go about handing out fines because they are having a bad hair day but rather because they are able to proof some sort of non conformity on the behalf, of in this case, United.
As far as publishing contact details - well isn't United a publicly traded company? I fail to see why anyones business contact details should be deemed "private". There is no such thing in business life. beside how did he get those details? I sure he didn't have to hack anything to get them. I am sure these people in question also have business cards that they give out. I fail to see where that can be deemed a secret.
The look alike of the deign is the ONLY place I would see a problem but then again they don't want him to shut down - I wonder why? Guess what then they would have to deal with all the petty stuff tooo.
Nov 30, 2012, 6:09 am
#63
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Now MFE... formerly SEA and DCA
Programs: Now UA free!, AA Ex Plat, AS MVP, Marriott Titanium for life
Posts: 664
? would the fact that they have let him be for 16 YEARS purhaps play a roll? I mean in all honesty they did profit from it too since they did not have to deal with all the petty stuff themselves. That costs companies a lot of money too.
The big nit picks that have led to fines well excuse me but it doesn't matter who you are in the real world if you mess up, be that accidently or deliberately and you are caught - you face the punishment. The FAA or any other controlling body doesn't go about handing out fines because they are having a bad hair day but rather because they are able to proof some sort of non conformity on the behalf, of in this case, United.
As far as publishing contact details - well isn't United a publicly traded company? I fail to see why anyones business contact details should be deemed "private". There is no such thing in business life. beside how did he get those details? I sure he didn't have to hack anything to get them. I am sure these people in question also have business cards that they give out. I fail to see where that can be deemed a secret.
The look alike of the deign is the ONLY place I would see a problem but then again they don't want him to shut down - I wonder why? Guess what then they would have to deal with all the petty stuff tooo.
The big nit picks that have led to fines well excuse me but it doesn't matter who you are in the real world if you mess up, be that accidently or deliberately and you are caught - you face the punishment. The FAA or any other controlling body doesn't go about handing out fines because they are having a bad hair day but rather because they are able to proof some sort of non conformity on the behalf, of in this case, United.
As far as publishing contact details - well isn't United a publicly traded company? I fail to see why anyones business contact details should be deemed "private". There is no such thing in business life. beside how did he get those details? I sure he didn't have to hack anything to get them. I am sure these people in question also have business cards that they give out. I fail to see where that can be deemed a secret.
The look alike of the deign is the ONLY place I would see a problem but then again they don't want him to shut down - I wonder why? Guess what then they would have to deal with all the petty stuff tooo.
Agreed. Thery have known about this for years and allowed its existience. The only thing we don't know, is any previous settlement discussions they may have had.
To me it is very clear that it is a parody of the site. The logo might be the issue here, as it only has a sad face drawn on top of it. However, CO will need to make the case for it being used in a commercial manner (CND law?). I did not see the contact info for UA people, but Smisek has made him self a public figure by introducing each flight and putting himself as the star in several commercials. Sorry Jeffy- you did that. I think there is a legitimate case for removing any non-public figure personal information.
Last, I think it is great commentary on the CO/ua website that it is so darn ugly and cheap that a random Canuck can copy it.
Nov 30, 2012, 6:17 am
#64
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,645
I've had a look at the website and the two lawsuits brought by United, Continental and three leading United-Employees personally (two of them Senior Counsel). I would like to address several questions raised in this thread.
Yes, in my opinion this is clearly a SLAPP action. United does try to bully him. If they just want their logo to be removed - they can't because its not there. If they want the parody-version of their logo removed, they could sue for that and costs. But they sue for all kinds of other things as well: damages, profits and statutory damages. This is an attack on the finances of the proprietor of said website.
United says in the court papers that the complaints filed on untied.com are indeed forwarded to United - with a delay, but they do not bother to specify that delay. (Apparently, all filings have been fwded since 1998.)
United has had more than 15 years to work out a cooperation with untied.com. But they did not. Out of some 26.000 complaints they have answered 100. BTW: Untied.com was started in 1997 with a money donation from a former United-pilot who was obviously very upset.
If United was more clever, they could have seen the opportunity in this website years ago and used it as part of a massive drive for customer service. As we all know, they have not done so.
As far as I understand Canadian copyright law, the parody use of the logo and name is legal. There is a clear disclaimer on every single webpage and there is a message you HAVE to click on when you visit the website for the first time.
About the contact data of four employees (at least three of them high up in the food chain) - I do not know the laws of Quebec. But, again, the airline does not ask for the removal of "lesser employee" contact data but of any and ALL employee contact data for all future. Personally, I think it is not wrong to publish the contact data of leading managers of one of the worlds largest airlines (who makes use of many public resources). Keep in mind that this is their professional contact info, not their private one.
While Untied.com has only published the employee's professional office contact data, United chose to publish his office AND his personal address in the lawsuit. Whereas the individual employees who are suing as well only state their office address in their court papers. This is telling.
The inflictions of the contact data publication are actually rather small. From the court documents I understand that all four United employees who are listed on Untied.com have received about 200 emails and voicemails altogether as a result. That is very little. I get more emails in a single day.
United cites ONE person (who is obviously deranged) who left derogatory voicemail messages. This is a HUGE company and I'm sure it has to deal with more than 1 abusive communication incident in any given day. No, it is absolutely not acceptable to compare airline employees to Nazis, but it is also not acceptable to blame this squarely on the proprietor of Untied.com.
BTW, I've had a look at official DoT statistics. United is doing really really bad, they are in a different league from ANY other US airline (with at least 1% market share). In July, 36% of all flights were delayed. It also has the highest number of chronically delayed flights (together with Expressjet), is doing bad in regards to luggage, and has the highest number of official DoT complaints per passenger at more than 5x the next worst airline. And Overbooking is rampant, the number of involuntary denied boardings is stellar. More than 1.000/month. No other US airline can compete with these statistics - not in absolute numbers and not in relative failures. And many indicators have deteriorated compared to last year.
The number of complaints entered at Untied.com has risen sharply this year. United blames it on the similar design. Go figure.
Yes, in my opinion this is clearly a SLAPP action. United does try to bully him. If they just want their logo to be removed - they can't because its not there. If they want the parody-version of their logo removed, they could sue for that and costs. But they sue for all kinds of other things as well: damages, profits and statutory damages. This is an attack on the finances of the proprietor of said website.
United says in the court papers that the complaints filed on untied.com are indeed forwarded to United - with a delay, but they do not bother to specify that delay. (Apparently, all filings have been fwded since 1998.)
United has had more than 15 years to work out a cooperation with untied.com. But they did not. Out of some 26.000 complaints they have answered 100. BTW: Untied.com was started in 1997 with a money donation from a former United-pilot who was obviously very upset.
If United was more clever, they could have seen the opportunity in this website years ago and used it as part of a massive drive for customer service. As we all know, they have not done so.
As far as I understand Canadian copyright law, the parody use of the logo and name is legal. There is a clear disclaimer on every single webpage and there is a message you HAVE to click on when you visit the website for the first time.
About the contact data of four employees (at least three of them high up in the food chain) - I do not know the laws of Quebec. But, again, the airline does not ask for the removal of "lesser employee" contact data but of any and ALL employee contact data for all future. Personally, I think it is not wrong to publish the contact data of leading managers of one of the worlds largest airlines (who makes use of many public resources). Keep in mind that this is their professional contact info, not their private one.
While Untied.com has only published the employee's professional office contact data, United chose to publish his office AND his personal address in the lawsuit. Whereas the individual employees who are suing as well only state their office address in their court papers. This is telling.
The inflictions of the contact data publication are actually rather small. From the court documents I understand that all four United employees who are listed on Untied.com have received about 200 emails and voicemails altogether as a result. That is very little. I get more emails in a single day.
United cites ONE person (who is obviously deranged) who left derogatory voicemail messages. This is a HUGE company and I'm sure it has to deal with more than 1 abusive communication incident in any given day. No, it is absolutely not acceptable to compare airline employees to Nazis, but it is also not acceptable to blame this squarely on the proprietor of Untied.com.
BTW, I've had a look at official DoT statistics. United is doing really really bad, they are in a different league from ANY other US airline (with at least 1% market share). In July, 36% of all flights were delayed. It also has the highest number of chronically delayed flights (together with Expressjet), is doing bad in regards to luggage, and has the highest number of official DoT complaints per passenger at more than 5x the next worst airline. And Overbooking is rampant, the number of involuntary denied boardings is stellar. More than 1.000/month. No other US airline can compete with these statistics - not in absolute numbers and not in relative failures. And many indicators have deteriorated compared to last year.
The number of complaints entered at Untied.com has risen sharply this year. United blames it on the similar design. Go figure.
1. UA has pulled investment and resources from every measurable aspect of customer experience to save money
2. UA is not willing to invest in what is required to make SHARES work
3. UA has ignored this silly web site for 15 years, one that makes it painfully obvious that its a parody
4. UA gets taken over by a lawyer, and now they are willing to take the PR humiliation of drawing attention to the site and themselves by launching this lawsuit and they are willing to invest resources in doing so that are unavailable for anything that would benefit customers
I could not write stranger fiction.
Nov 30, 2012, 8:35 pm
#65
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5
Amazing what a little actual research can reveal...
It's interesting (albeit normal) that the initial posts on this issue were quick emotional reactions from people who knew very little about the matter beyond the short news articles. Granted, this is a "casual talk" forum and not intended to be an academic endeavor; and consequently I accept the forum for what it is and understand quick comments to be just that -- initial perceptions.
But as this discussion gained some depth I was surprised at how many people were willing to make broad categorical statements, criticisms, and (effectively) condemnations of either side when only the proverbial tip of the iceberg was known.
Sokolov's comprehensive comments showed the first sign of someone who was initially unfamiliar with the case that was willing to engage in some research before posting his/her comments. And...suddenly it becomes apparent many of the quick-to-judge comments were far off the mark.
I did not help start the UNTIED website, but I began supporting it after it was well established. I, like many others, found it by surfing the internet for information about United because I was aware of numerous safety violations and issues of both customer and employee abuse. There are several current and former UAL pilots who support the site along with a substantial number of fight attendants, mechanics, and CSRs. That alone is noteworthy. I also know a considerable percentage (and perhaps a majority) of financial support comes from current and former United Employees.
For those who care (or those who are wondering), I have talked to the website's creator ONCE for about 10 minutes. We have exchanged a number of emails over the years, often to discuss the best way to help someone that has contacted the site feeling desperate about their situation -- both employees and passengers. In some cases Mr. Cooperstock wanted my perspective (due to my aviation and former UAL experience) on whether or not a complaint was likely valid.
I am sure most people that have participated in this discussion would be shocked to learn how careful the owner has been to validate complaints before publishing them, and how many "marginally meaningful" complaints he doesn't publish (though they are nevertheless forwarded to United and kept in his database.) He has "vetoed" some posts that I wanted him to publish because he felt they were somewhat inflammatory and didn't contribute to the overall objectives of safety and treatment of passengers and employees.
You all have every "right" to voice your criticism of Mr. Cooperstock's style, venue, comments, and strategy. Perhaps there was/is a more effective approach than Untied.com, but because I personally know how many good things the site has accomplished it is admittedly hard for me to imagine a more effective approach.
The criticisms I consider invalid are those who claim to know what the professor's "true motivation" is. After 15 years of observation I am confident I know his motivation, and it is exactly what his website says. There is no personal vendetta. He, like me, would honestly like to help transform United Airlines into the world's premier airline with happy employees and passengers, safe aircraft, and a nice net revenue. We would ALL win with such a transformation! But UAL management has been defiant, disingenuous, dishonest, and disinterested. (BTW, does ANYONE else have an alliteration appreciation?)
I AM pleased to see this civil discussion has motivated some people to invest enough effort to uncover sufficient information to make reasonable, informed, and rational comments.
But as this discussion gained some depth I was surprised at how many people were willing to make broad categorical statements, criticisms, and (effectively) condemnations of either side when only the proverbial tip of the iceberg was known.
Sokolov's comprehensive comments showed the first sign of someone who was initially unfamiliar with the case that was willing to engage in some research before posting his/her comments. And...suddenly it becomes apparent many of the quick-to-judge comments were far off the mark.
I did not help start the UNTIED website, but I began supporting it after it was well established. I, like many others, found it by surfing the internet for information about United because I was aware of numerous safety violations and issues of both customer and employee abuse. There are several current and former UAL pilots who support the site along with a substantial number of fight attendants, mechanics, and CSRs. That alone is noteworthy. I also know a considerable percentage (and perhaps a majority) of financial support comes from current and former United Employees.
For those who care (or those who are wondering), I have talked to the website's creator ONCE for about 10 minutes. We have exchanged a number of emails over the years, often to discuss the best way to help someone that has contacted the site feeling desperate about their situation -- both employees and passengers. In some cases Mr. Cooperstock wanted my perspective (due to my aviation and former UAL experience) on whether or not a complaint was likely valid.
I am sure most people that have participated in this discussion would be shocked to learn how careful the owner has been to validate complaints before publishing them, and how many "marginally meaningful" complaints he doesn't publish (though they are nevertheless forwarded to United and kept in his database.) He has "vetoed" some posts that I wanted him to publish because he felt they were somewhat inflammatory and didn't contribute to the overall objectives of safety and treatment of passengers and employees.
You all have every "right" to voice your criticism of Mr. Cooperstock's style, venue, comments, and strategy. Perhaps there was/is a more effective approach than Untied.com, but because I personally know how many good things the site has accomplished it is admittedly hard for me to imagine a more effective approach.
The criticisms I consider invalid are those who claim to know what the professor's "true motivation" is. After 15 years of observation I am confident I know his motivation, and it is exactly what his website says. There is no personal vendetta. He, like me, would honestly like to help transform United Airlines into the world's premier airline with happy employees and passengers, safe aircraft, and a nice net revenue. We would ALL win with such a transformation! But UAL management has been defiant, disingenuous, dishonest, and disinterested. (BTW, does ANYONE else have an alliteration appreciation?)
I AM pleased to see this civil discussion has motivated some people to invest enough effort to uncover sufficient information to make reasonable, informed, and rational comments.
Dec 2, 2012, 6:59 am
#66
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: BOS/ORH
Programs: AS 75K
Posts: 18,325
I received an email from the people that make the ExCon bracelets. UA legal is forcing them to shut down their sales due to copyright issues. Not sure why they are going so copyright crazy all of a sudden
Dec 2, 2012, 9:43 am
#67
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,645
Dec 2, 2012, 10:43 am
#68
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: BOS/ORH
Programs: AS 75K
Posts: 18,325
Dec 2, 2012, 1:39 pm
#72
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: USA
Programs: UA (1K, 2MM), AA, Avis, National
Posts: 867
This kind of reminds me of Verizon threatening to sue 2600 magazine for registering verizonreallysucks.com domain name. Later, Verizon backed down.
Dec 17, 2012, 2:48 am
#73
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: eastern Europe & NC
Posts: 4,527
Hooray for consumer sites like Untied.com!!!! Down with despicable thugs like UA who try to quash such sites!!!! I have sent my contribution to help preserve freedom of speech in this fight.
My big concern is that this case is in Canada, which lacks our First Amendment. Free speech is far less protected there. In the timeshare field, I watched how the Organization for Timeshare in Europe, a developer organization, used legal warfare to harass and destroy the consumer site Crimeshare, which would have gotten nowhere if both organizations were in the US. I do not want to see the same happen to Untied.com
While I had already switched my elite status over to AA through a challenge when UA gobbled up CO and severly downgraded its ff program, I have now decided due to this latest thuggery with Untied, I will absolutely not fly UA under any circumstances. They can get stuffed!!!!!!
My big concern is that this case is in Canada, which lacks our First Amendment. Free speech is far less protected there. In the timeshare field, I watched how the Organization for Timeshare in Europe, a developer organization, used legal warfare to harass and destroy the consumer site Crimeshare, which would have gotten nowhere if both organizations were in the US. I do not want to see the same happen to Untied.com
While I had already switched my elite status over to AA through a challenge when UA gobbled up CO and severly downgraded its ff program, I have now decided due to this latest thuggery with Untied, I will absolutely not fly UA under any circumstances. They can get stuffed!!!!!!
Last edited by Carolinian; Dec 17, 2012 at 3:51 am
Dec 17, 2012, 3:48 am
#75
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: eastern Europe & NC
Posts: 4,527
As a PMCO elite, the factor I look at is that it was apparently the PMUA crowd that was handling the merged ff program. The resulting train wreck is why I did a challenge am an now an AA Plat instead. (Well, I guess my UA elite status from flying on CO in 2011 still does have a couple more months or so to run.)