Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
When Will BA Sue VS For Their Critics  
User currently offlineuaeflyer From United Arab Emirates, joined Nov 2006, 1073 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 8295 times:

I was in Heathrow several weeks ago and saw the return of "No way BA/AA" on Virgin Atlantic planes.
I'm wondering here, why didn't British Airways or American Airlines took action against Sir Branson.
Secondly, why the authorities such as IATA, FAA, and BAA take action , and put laws that protect airlines from insulting each other.
From my personal view, I see VS action or behaviour, you name it, is not ethical.
I have nothing against VS and nothing to BA or AA , but that made me thinking.

54 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLuftfahrer From Germany, joined Mar 2009, 1013 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 8237 times:

Quoting uaeflyer (Thread starter):
"No way BA/AA"

...is not particularly insulting or unethical, I find. Ryanair has plenty of aircraft carrying slogans like "Bye Bye Wizz Air" or "Goodbye Latehansa" and that seems to be just fine. To a degree they advertise other carriers with it.



Et là tu montes encore plus haut et ça persiste, alors on vole
User currently offlinelhr380 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 8237 times:

Quoting uaeflyer (Thread starter):

I find it funny, especially when VS park that 744 outside the BA lounge in T3 in full view of the windows.

Los of airlines have used it, and will continue to. VS FR EZY and a few others im sure.


User currently offlinebaexecutive From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 740 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 8176 times:

I wouldn't pay much attention to what VS paint on the sides of there aircraft, at one time they had

'4 engines for 4 long haul'

     


User currently offlineTristarAtLCA From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2007, 616 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 8043 times:

Maybe BA should respond with:

'Where you putting the other two engines on your A330's'  



If you was right..................I'd agree with you
User currently offlineVasu From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 3896 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 8007 times:

Any photos showing the slogan back on?

User currently offlinePe@rson From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 19215 posts, RR: 52
Reply 6, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 8003 times:

I find such things funny, not insulting or whatever.

[Edited 2010-03-18 14:10:57]


"Everyone writing for the Telegraph knows that the way to grab eyeballs is with Ryanair and/or sex."
User currently offlineDCA-ROCguy From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 4499 posts, RR: 33
Reply 7, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 7991 times:

Western societies generally have a broad degree of free speech, which is a good thing. If Virgin Atlantic is the owner of their planes, or if they lease them and the lessor approves, they are free to put messages on them. The idea that a government could tell an airline in general not to put political slogans related to their business, on their planes, is odious. One can debate the merit of the messages, or whether putting them on planes is a good business practice. But it's most certainly Virgin's legal right to do so, as it should be.

In this case, the slogan will likely soon be out of date, after the comment period ends.

Jim



Need a new airline paint scheme? Better call Saul! (Bass that is)
User currently offline1stfl94 From United Kingdom, joined May 2006, 1455 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 7918 times:

BA could probably try suing VS but their background with the Dirty Tricks campaign in the 1990s would probably cause problems. Also VS first applied the slogan back in 1997, 13 years is quite a long time to wait to complain about the practice.

Personally I preferred VS's slogan when they started Dubai 'Keep Discovering...Until you Find the Best', much more subtle and fun dig at their competitor.


User currently offlineexFATboy From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2974 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 7645 times:

Quoting uaeflyer (Thread starter):
I'm wondering here, why didn't British Airways or American Airlines took action against Sir Branson.
Secondly, why the authorities such as IATA, FAA, and BAA take action , and put laws that protect airlines from insulting each other.
From my personal view, I see VS action or behaviour, you name it, is not ethical.

On what legal grounds could BA or AA sue? "No Way BA/AA" is stating a political opinion, in Western (and particularly in Anglospheric) countries expression of political opinion carries the strongest protection...if BA or AA tried to sue, a counter-suit would be inevitable. He could also sue to overturn any attempt by BAA, FAA, or whoever else to overturn regulations banning the expression of opinion on planes.

Actually, "4 engines 4 longhaul" might have offered a window of opportunity for a suit, on the grounds that it implies that 2 engine long-haul aircraft are inherently less safe than 2-engine aircraft. But apparently BA, AA, and everyone else decided that it wasn't worth a suit, I'd guess because it'd be very difficult to prove that the slogan actually damaged anyone's business.


User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 7579 times:

Quoting uaeflyer (Thread starter):
From my personal view, I see VS action or behaviour, you name it, is not ethical.

In which case, do you consider the famous BA 'dirty tricks' campaign against VS to be ethical? I think after that, and the resulting having to settle out of court (to prevent it being made fully public in open court BA would be on pretty thin ice doing what you suggest. Besides, I see nothing insulting about it and it's an opinion about a specific matter which VS is entitled to have.


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 11, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 7508 times:

Quoting uaeflyer (Thread starter):
I'm wondering here, why didn't British Airways or American Airlines took action against Sir Branson.

There's no basis for the action. It's not slander (it's expressing VS's opinion, not a statement about BA or AA) and there's no way BA could show they'd been damaged by VS for doing it. Even though Western countries have a somewhat deserved reputation for frivolous lawsuits, you still need *some* basis for the suit and there just isn't one here.

Quoting uaeflyer (Thread starter):
Secondly, why the authorities such as IATA, FAA, and BAA take action , and put laws that protect airlines from insulting each other.

Why would they? BA and AA are more than capable of "protecting" themselves from this type of action. In addition, IATA, FAA, and BAA have no legal authority over something like this. The only ones who could do it are the UK government (maybe...the ICAO treaties would get tricky) or maybe EASA, but they have no reason to do so and would probably get dinged pretty quickly for a constitutional violation.

Quoting uaeflyer (Thread starter):
From my personal view, I see VS action or behaviour, you name it, is not ethical.

Although I disagree, even if it was unethical there's no law against being unethical when it doesn't damage the other party. In this case, BA hasn't been damaged in any way that could be demonstrated in court.

Tom.


User currently offlineEleVAted From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 296 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 7486 times:

Give me a break. It's called humor!

User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 61
Reply 13, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 7463 times:

Why should BA even debase themselves by lowering themselves to Branson's level?

If you ask me, the situation between BA and Virgin is much like that between China and Taiwan.

For all the fighting and posturing of decades past, China today recognizes that there is really no need to fight an actual or rhetorical war over Taiwan since, slowly but surely, they're winning the long war through economic and military dominance.

The same is true of BA and Virgin: there is absolutely no need for BA to even get into a scrape with Virgin like they might have 20 years ago since BA is now pretty much getting everything they want. Pretty soon they'll be merged with Iberia and have antitrust immunity with AA - which will solidify BA's position on their strategically critical North Atlantic routes for years to come.

Virgin, meanwhile, isn't what it used to be. The company is hemmed in by congestion at Heathrow - like BA and every other airline - and has struggled to recapture the brand identity that it used to pronounce so strongly. And, needless to say, Branson's antics are wearing a little thin for a lot of people.

Virgin is in a fundamentally weak strategic position while BA has scored some massive strategic victories in the recent past. And Branson knows it. So just let him piss and moan on and on. The sense I constantly get is that progressively fewer and fewer people are listening, anyway.


User currently offlineMcMax From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 304 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 7273 times:

Quoting exFATboy (Reply 9):
"No Way BA/AA" is stating a political opinion, in Western (and particularly in Anglospheric) countries expression of political opinion carries the strongest protection...

Actually, it's not considered political speech. Rather, it would be in a lower class of speech called commercial speech. While most commercial speech is protected, there are circumstances where it can go too far, and would not be protected under the law (e.g., slander/libel, fraud or an intentional/negligent disregard for the truth). That being said, VS' slogan would definitely be protected as commercial speech, and there would be very little BA could do about it. Plus, I would imagine if BA responded, it would merely provide another platform for the the Big Blowharded Megalomaniac to spout his drivel even further.



De minimis non curat lex tamen ego curao
User currently offlinevv701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7474 posts, RR: 17
Reply 15, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 7194 times:

Quoting Vasu (Reply 5):
Any photos showing the slogan back on?

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dmitriy Pichugin - Russian AviaPhoto Team



User currently offlineEDICHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 7131 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 13):
Why should BA even debase themselves by lowering themselves to Branson's level?


BA have a long history of debasing themselves.

Given that BA have twice been 'found out' for unethical/illegal business practices in specific attempts (one successfully) to bankrupt other carriers, I would suggest that BA have to raise themselves considerably to reach SRB's level.

[Edited 2010-03-18 20:20:35]

User currently offlineQantas777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 484 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 7117 times:

BA should slam VS. Instead of their stupid OneWorld 744, make one that says something like VS 4 engines 4 global warming, or no way VS, something that would start the fire. No balls on BA's part.

User currently offlineEDICHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 7105 times:

Quoting Qantas777 (Reply 17):
Instead of their stupid OneWorld 744, make one that says something like VS 4 engines 4 global warming, or no way VS,

Oh yeah that would be a really effective slogan on a BA 744!  


User currently offlineEDICHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 7084 times:

Quoting uaeflyer (Thread starter):
IATA, FAA, and BAA take action , and put laws that protect airlines from insulting each other.

None of these bodies have any kind of authority in this matter. IATA is effectively a trade association. The FAA regulates air travel in the US and has nothing whatsoever to do with a UK carrier. BAA is a private airport management company which is a subsidiary of a large Spanish conglomerate.

Quoting exFATboy (Reply 9):
BAA, FAA, or whoever else to overturn regulations banning the expression of opinion on planes.

I would be surprised if any regulatory body has such powers, in the free world anyway.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11559 posts, RR: 61
Reply 20, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 7080 times:

Quoting EDICHC (Reply 16):
BA have a long history of debasing themselves.

Given that BA have twice been 'found out' for unethical/illegal business practices in specific attempts (one successfully) to bankrupt other carriers, I would suggest that BA have to raise themselves considerably to reach SRB's level.

Yeah, yeah - BA aggressively and unethically defended their effective monopoly. That was 20 years ago.

Now it's 2010. That same carping and complaining from Branson is starting to get old. He needs to find some new antics.


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 21, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 7062 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 20):
Now it's 2010. That same carping and complaining from Branson is starting to get old. He needs to find some new antics

  ....time to move on...the quote is a bit old and outdated now.....



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineEDICHC From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 7059 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 20):
Now it's 2010. That same carping and complaining from Branson is starting to get old. He needs to find some new antics.

Perhaps it is, in your opinion, a lame or tired tactic, that's not the point. The point is SRB has never used unethical business practice in an attempt to drive BA or any other carrier out of business. BA has - twice. Therefore I maintain that is is clearly unfair to talk about BA "lowering themselves to Branson's level" when they are historically well below that level.


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25144 posts, RR: 85
Reply 23, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 6973 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting exFATboy (Reply 9):
Actually, "4 engines 4 longhaul" might have offered a window of opportunity for a suit, on the grounds that it implies that 2 engine long-haul aircraft are inherently less safe than 2-engine aircraft.

You obviously read that into it - and many did - but it doesn't actually say that at all. It says what was true at the tine - that Virgin's long hail aircraft had four engines.

There was a time when Qantas had an all 747 fleet and proudly advertised the fact. But that didn't suggest that any other aircraft was unsafe.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineRebelDJ From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 112 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 5 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6838 times:

What I find quite bizzare is that I believe BA maintain VS aircraft at LHR (or at least they did a few years ago) - so you could easily have a BA mechanic working on a VS aircraft wearing the "No way BA/AA" slogan.

25 alwaysontherun : The funniest thing I read in a long time on this site!! Thank you for making my day, the both of you: after all, 1 has to start the joke for the othe
26 planesmith : I don't think any carrier would go to court over that slogan - there are far too many passengers out there who are MUCH happier with a couple of engi
27 Burkhard : That all depends on the laws of the country. In Germany, it is completely forbidden to use the name of a competitor in adds, even in a modified versio
28 ridgid727 : And Branson will, and it will be fodder for everyone again.
29 EDICHC : How did Ryanair manage to use Lufthansa's name when they displayed the "Auf Wiedersehn Lufthansa" slogan on their aircraft a while back? I'm sure ple
30 Burkhard : The aircraft isn't registered in Germany, so they would have to go to a court in Ireland...
31 motopolitico : I don't know anything about laws in the UAE or the Arabian peninsula as a whole. In a free society, we are free to insult each other. In this case, t
32 Post contains images SevenHeavy : VS have had their own engineering division (set up at LHR) for as long as I can remember - at least 15 years. Ironically, when BA recently started se
33 RebelDJ : My mistake then - I was just going on the word of a BA maintenance guy who had worked on VS a/c
34 Bongodog1964 : To the vast majority it is unethical to collude with a competitor, in order to fix fuel surcharges, and then report this to the competition authoriti
35 OP3000 : VS may have been unethical, but BA was being unethical and stupid.
36 UAL747DEN : I agree with you, its funny how easily people forget what BA has done over the years and the last one being not very long ago at all. BA is far far b
37 Post contains images TristarAtLCA : Not me guv'
38 Bongodog1964 : When was "not that long ago" ? are you referring to the fuel surcharge which VS fully collaborated on ? if not, you are looking a long way back.
39 borism : How many brits know what BA/AA means anyway? Of course we A.nutters understand exactly what it is, and would probably even argue that there should be
40 willd : I don't see any legal basis that BA could sue VS on. As a lawyer I get fed up with people believing that they can sue anyone willy nilly. Sadly, maybe
41 EDICHC : To turn this around I would have said in that instance VS was stupid in the first place then advised the regulator when they realised the folly of th
42 Post contains links and images UAL747 : I personally find this image HILARIOUS! From this trip report by SR 103: Kingfisher First On The A330: Redefining Luxury (by SR 103 Jan 13 2010 in Tri
43 UAL747DEN : That is pretty good but its too bad you tried to take my name!!!!!!!!
44 Post contains images UAL747 : Ahem, I'd check our "join dates" if I were you. Then tell me who tried to take who's name.
45 Bongodog1964 : You really are having a laugh aren't you ? "admitted wrongdoing at the earliest opportunity" I recall it took in the region of two years to make the
46 EDICHC : So you are equating one wrongdoing which VS admitted of their own volition, however tardy you may consider it, and did not seek to undermine another
47 Bongodog1964 : Where did I ever express any opinion on the "dirty tricks" campaigns ? Certainly never here on A-net, and to the best of my knowledge nowhere. A prim
48 EDICHC : I never said it justified anything. I did say it was inappropriate to compare the activities of the two companies. It might be two decades old and in
49 Bongodog1964 : I may well do that. Please bear in mind though that the BA management from that era are truly "dead and buried" They were old school from the nationa
50 EDICHC : By that I presume you are referring to primarily the first two Chairmen of BA plc (who by all accounts were the chief instigators of the Dirty Tricks
51 GDB : Who really cares? Though I'd be amused to see some comments aimed at VS when we get OUR A380's. Remember all those pronouncements by Branson from when
52 Kaiarahi : How about "VirginF1-DNF" or just "Virgin -DNF"; I guess "Virgin - immaculate misconception" is a bit long. So where does all the resistance of U.S. p
53 BA174 : They have a few oneworld 744s now about 7 I think.
54 Bongodog1964 : Slow, noisy, and cramped might have something to dow ith it.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Mergers: When Will BA Make An Offer For AA? posted Mon Apr 7 2008 01:24:04 by FXramper
When Will CO And WN Replace Their 735 For The 736? posted Sun Jan 21 2001 00:17:13 by Dellatorre
Will BA Or VS Ever Supply Laptop Power In Economy? posted Sat Feb 23 2008 04:20:19 by 8herveg
When Will BA Finish Installing Avod On B777s? posted Tue Feb 6 2007 01:15:36 by 8herveg
When Will BA Airbus Family Be Replaced posted Sun Jun 4 2006 10:09:17 by BA787
When Will BA 747s Be Replaced? posted Sat Jun 3 2006 15:16:58 by BA787
When Will Song Begin To Reconfigure Their Planes? posted Thu Feb 23 2006 05:20:51 by DL4EVR
When Will EgyptAir Get Rid Of Their 737-500's? posted Tue Jan 24 2006 23:44:49 by RichM
When Will AC Have PTV's On Their A/c? posted Fri Jan 6 2006 18:08:04 by AirCanada014
When Will BA Have Real Silverware Again!?!? posted Wed Nov 30 2005 20:22:04 by Radelow