Oct 30, 2013, 3:36 pm
Last edit by: Ocn Vw 1K
UA Insider's reply in posts 247 and 254 of this thread:
Hi everyone,
We recognize the importance and value to you of accessible and transparent information about United flights. It’s a meaningful part of your travel planning, and we are committed to providing useful information that is both accurate and preserves the integrity of United’s data and systems.
While we are committed to data transparency, Expert Flyer has been accessing united.com in an unauthorized fashion to retrieve UA availability. In addition, these activities have consumed significant united.com bandwidth that could otherwise be used by regular consumers. As a result, we had to take this action to protect the security and integrity of United’s systems.
Thank you for your understanding as to why we had to take this action. We continue to look at ways in which we can provide you with timely and useful information (some of which you will see in new releases of our own digital channels) as well as with partners that have authorized access to our data.
Aaron Goldberg
Sr. Manager - Customer Experience Planning
United Airlines
We recognize the importance and value to you of accessible and transparent information about United flights. It’s a meaningful part of your travel planning, and we are committed to providing useful information that is both accurate and preserves the integrity of United’s data and systems.
While we are committed to data transparency, Expert Flyer has been accessing united.com in an unauthorized fashion to retrieve UA availability. In addition, these activities have consumed significant united.com bandwidth that could otherwise be used by regular consumers. As a result, we had to take this action to protect the security and integrity of United’s systems.
Thank you for your understanding as to why we had to take this action. We continue to look at ways in which we can provide you with timely and useful information (some of which you will see in new releases of our own digital channels) as well as with partners that have authorized access to our data.
Aaron Goldberg
Sr. Manager - Customer Experience Planning
United Airlines
UA Blocking Expert Flyer and KVS Access to R and Elite Award Searches.
Dec 4, 2013, 12:51 pm
#706
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: LAX,SNA,SAN
Programs: UA GS, Marriott LP, Hertz Gold
Posts: 861
LOL, bandwidth? HUH? 200-400 queries a day is affecting bandwidth at the worlds leading airline?
Dec 4, 2013, 1:07 pm
#707
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 288
First, KVS is not a browser as it doesn't display web pages as web pages.
Second, the same argument can be made about EF. Let's look at it from an actual IT point of view:
- Screen scrapers (like EF and KVS) make HTTP requests for the web pages to get at the html embedded within.
- Real web browsers do the same however they also make HTTP requests for image files, CSS files, JavaScript files, etc.
So if you want to make the "bandwidth" argument then EF would put LESS load on UA.com then someone using a regular web browser as there are less resources being requested from the server for every page load. The server, btw, services all requests equally. In addition, if someone can't do an award search on EF they'll do it on UA.com directly, which means that the net server load is the same, yes, including alert checks as now the user doesn't have to do them manually.
No, star_world asked a question and I answered it, calm down. I personally don't care who is "punished" as you put it. However I don't appreciate UA's hypocrisy of saying that the issue was screen scraping (their words) but then not going after all screen scrapers that profit from doing so.
Second, the same argument can be made about EF. Let's look at it from an actual IT point of view:
- Screen scrapers (like EF and KVS) make HTTP requests for the web pages to get at the html embedded within.
- Real web browsers do the same however they also make HTTP requests for image files, CSS files, JavaScript files, etc.
So if you want to make the "bandwidth" argument then EF would put LESS load on UA.com then someone using a regular web browser as there are less resources being requested from the server for every page load. The server, btw, services all requests equally. In addition, if someone can't do an award search on EF they'll do it on UA.com directly, which means that the net server load is the same, yes, including alert checks as now the user doesn't have to do them manually.
do you have some agenda to prove by naming and shaming other still live services? I am sure UA knows of them in some way, but why highlight them now? Or the moral voice in you wont be quiet until all violators are punished?
Dec 4, 2013, 1:13 pm
#708
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,645
How have you learned that EF is generating "vast" numbers of dummy MP accounts?
I've noticed the site seems slower since they stopped EF.
Dec 4, 2013, 1:21 pm
#709
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PHX
Programs: AS 75K; UA 1MM; Hyatt Globalist; Marriott LTP; Hilton Diamond (Aspire)
Posts: 56,455
UA and their lawyers wouldn't care as KVS is a 3rd party making money from displaying UA's data, period. The fact that KVS asks for a MP# and password (which EF never did) is even worse as then it's a "security issue" as the airlines like to say. If EF asked for a MP# and password they would still get shutdown. Case in point: AwardWallet. They do the same as KVS according to you (only access UA.com on behalf of user with users credentials), but UA sent them a C&D anyway. Also, if KVS was so legit, he wouldn't be hiding from the airlines so thoroughly as he does.
When people make arguments like this, they lose all credibility and there is no point in debating further. I'm checking out of this discussion. Have a good day everyone
Dec 4, 2013, 1:24 pm
#710
Join Date: Jan 2011
Programs: UA S, Marriott P
Posts: 1,154
First, KVS is not a browser as it doesn't display web pages as web pages.
Second, the same argument can be made about EF. Let's look at it from an actual IT point of view:
- Screen scrapers (like EF and KVS) make HTTP requests for the web pages to get at the html embedded within.
- Real web browsers do the same however they also make HTTP requests for image files, CSS files, JavaScript files, etc.
Second, the same argument can be made about EF. Let's look at it from an actual IT point of view:
- Screen scrapers (like EF and KVS) make HTTP requests for the web pages to get at the html embedded within.
- Real web browsers do the same however they also make HTTP requests for image files, CSS files, JavaScript files, etc.
Does mobile browser that reformats the page also qualify? KVS gets html page and displays it in format that the author and user prefer. EF is a distributed cloud services - if you dont see the difference I guess we will just have to disagree.
I dont buy bandwidth argument either so we agree there.
IMHO a good answer would have been "yes"
Dec 4, 2013, 1:31 pm
#711
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: ORD / DUB / LHR
Programs: UA 1K MM; BA Silver; Marriott Plat
Posts: 8,243
Very, very difficult to do it any other way.I'm afraid this analysis is just wrong. There's a fundamental difference between (a) accessing UA's site pursuant to ToS that you have agreed to, then scraping data and selling it to third parties in violation of those ToS, and (b) selling an application that allows a subscriber to UA's site to access and display information in a more useful manner.
When people make arguments like this, they lose all credibility and there is no point in debating further. I'm checking out of this discussion. Have a good day everyone
When people make arguments like this, they lose all credibility and there is no point in debating further. I'm checking out of this discussion. Have a good day everyone
Dec 4, 2013, 1:32 pm
#712
Moderator: United Airlines
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SFO
Programs: UA Plat 1.995MM, Hyatt Discoverist, Marriott Plat/LT Gold, Hilton Silver, IHG Plat
Posts: 66,854
Bottom line, EF inventory alerts put it in a different class than the other folks
-- drove significantly higher traffic
-- enabled queue jumping more so than the others
And those asking for EF response, you'll never see anything until EF has lost all hope of making an UA arrangement. Why poison the well if there is the hope of a deal?
Dec 4, 2013, 1:34 pm
#713
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 288
Me too. Oops.
You should read the TOS (http://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/legal.aspx):
So, either the user is the KVS/EF subscriber, or KVS/EF themselves.
- If you believe the "user" is KVS/EF then both are in violation as KVS is a "software product" that does "alter", "display", etc etc the data.
- If you believe the "user" is the end user, then there should be no issue with any tool as the end user (the KVS/EF sub) isn't doing any of those things regardless of the service used.
So I'll say it again, when it comes to EF, KVS, Award Nexus, etc, either they are all ok, or none of them are from a legal point of view.
Thanks for the personal attack, the adults will continue the conversation. Goodbye.
I'm afraid this analysis is just wrong. There's a fundamental difference between (a) accessing UA's site pursuant to ToS that you have agreed to, then scraping data and selling it to third parties in violation of those ToS, and (b) selling an application that allows a subscriber to UA's site to access and display information in a more useful manner
This Web site is for the User's personal, noncommercial use only. User agrees not to modify, copy, alter, distribute, transmit, display, perform, reproduce, publish, license, create derivative works from, transfer, or sell any information, software, products or services obtained from this Web site without United Airlines' prior written permission.
- If you believe the "user" is KVS/EF then both are in violation as KVS is a "software product" that does "alter", "display", etc etc the data.
- If you believe the "user" is the end user, then there should be no issue with any tool as the end user (the KVS/EF sub) isn't doing any of those things regardless of the service used.
So I'll say it again, when it comes to EF, KVS, Award Nexus, etc, either they are all ok, or none of them are from a legal point of view.
When people make arguments like this, they lose all credibility and there is no point in debating further. I'm checking out of this discussion. Have a good day everyone
Dec 4, 2013, 1:44 pm
#714
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 288
If your "educated guess" is that you work for UA or know someone that does, then get back to us with an educated guess as to why UA hasn't yet done a deal with EF as they have offered to? Since we know from EF's email responses that the ball is in UA's court.
If they're going to publicly say it...
https://twitter.com/united/status/400515903281831936
If they're going to publicly say it...
https://twitter.com/united/status/400515903281831936
Dec 4, 2013, 1:54 pm
#716
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: LAX,SNA,SAN
Programs: UA GS, Marriott LP, Hertz Gold
Posts: 861
Yes, I made up those numbers(200-400) , just throwing an example out there. The world's leading airline.
Dec 4, 2013, 2:12 pm
#717
Join Date: Jan 2013
Programs: UA 1K, Hilton Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 304
- If you believe the "user" is KVS/EF then both are in violation as KVS is a "software product" that does "alter", "display", etc etc the data.
Dec 4, 2013, 2:18 pm
#718
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 288
What you don't grasp is from a legal point of view, there is no difference if their complaint is a 3rd party making money off of their data.
Putting that argument aside for the moment, what about AwardNexus? A website, same as EF, has automated checking, same as EF, so UA should have gone after them the same, but didn't. Explain that one, without a personal attack this time.
Putting that argument aside for the moment, what about AwardNexus? A website, same as EF, has automated checking, same as EF, so UA should have gone after them the same, but didn't. Explain that one, without a personal attack this time.
Last edited by Ocn Vw 1K; Dec 4, 2013 at 4:55 pm Reason: Conforming edit.
Dec 4, 2013, 2:24 pm
#719
Join Date: Aug 2011
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 8,634
What you don't grasp is from a legal point of view, there is no difference if their complaint is a 3rd party making money off of their data.
Putting that argument aside for the moment, what about AwardNexus? A website, same as EF, has automated checking, same as EF, so UA should have gone after them the same, but didn't. Explain that one, without a personal attack this time.
Putting that argument aside for the moment, what about AwardNexus? A website, same as EF, has automated checking, same as EF, so UA should have gone after them the same, but didn't. Explain that one, without a personal attack this time.
What inaction against AwardNexus has to do with anything is completely beyond me.
Maybe you just don't understand the difference between how EF and KVS work?
Last edited by Ocn Vw 1K; Dec 4, 2013 at 4:56 pm Reason: Per FT TOS.
Dec 4, 2013, 2:39 pm
#720
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 288
The legal term is "precedent".