First off, blue font with the terms and service agreement is hard to argue that it is conspicuous. Secondly, the National homepage having in small black font is not exactly conspicuous either. The users aren’t in a clickwrap or browsewrap agreement with National’s terms and agreements as users aren’t clicking “I agree” or “I accept” anywhere. It is a hyperlink that hardly anyone would click. Therefore, it is hard to state that this is creating a binding agreement between National, LineJump, and its users. Therefore, breach of contract might fail for National if they can’t prove the terms and agreements were conspicuous and created a binding agreement that forbids LineJumps use of securing A seats for people.
I think this could be a show of misappropriation with trespass to chattel. Although, I am not exactly positive as I haven’t learned about trespass to chattel prior to the readings.
I believe they could win for Computer Fraud and Abuse Act too. Also, why did LineJump not acknowledge the cease and desist letter. They are intentionally accessing National’s information without authorization and obtaining information that is not prohibited. They are committing fraud by acting as if they have approval to be doing this from National when in fact they do not.
Leave a Reply