Ryanair wins screen scraping case against Booking.com in US court ruling

Jurisdiction & Corporate Structure

• Several comments note the irony of two “European” companies litigating in a US court.
• Others point out Booking is ultimately a US (Delaware) holding company with a Dutch subsidiary; “nationality” is seen as fuzzy for multinational groups.
• Delaware is noted as a common incorporation venue; some question its courts after other high‑profile cases, but no consensus.

What Booking.com Was Allegedly Doing

• Distinction drawn between:
  • Meta‑search services (Google Flights, Skyscanner) that show prices and redirect users to the airline.
  • OTAs that fully book tickets on behalf of users, using automation/screen‑scraping and acting as the merchant.
• Booking (often via partners like Etraveli) is described as programmatically using Ryanair’s site, including the “myRyanair” account area, to buy tickets, add their own fees, and sit between airline and passenger.
• Users report practical problems: name changes, schedule changes, and refunds become slower, more expensive, or opaque when a third party is in the middle.

Scraping vs Reselling & CFAA

• Many commenters stress the case is not about simple read‑only scraping of public pages, but about:
  • Accessing password‑protected sections after explicit cease‑and‑desists.
  • Acting as an unauthorized reseller, misrepresenting who the “customer” is.
• The CFAA verdict is seen as hinging on “unauthorized access” to a protected (login‑gated) part of the site and inducing third parties to do so.
• Some think this conflicts with the HiQ v. LinkedIn precedent on scraping public data; others note the key distinction is authentication walls and prior revocation of permission.

Consumer Impact & Business Models

• One camp argues OTAs often look cheaper due to better search and caching, but real total cost may be higher once baggage and changes are factored in.
• Another camp says OTAs genuinely undercut airlines on some routes, and consumers value avoiding clunky airline sites and upsell “dark patterns.”
• Several note Ryanair’s strong incentives:
  • Keep users on its own funnels to sell add‑ons and packages.
  • Protect its own package‑holiday business from competitors bundling flights and hotels.
• Critics see Ryanair’s stance as anti‑competitive and hostile to price comparison; defenders say it’s about controlling resellers and customer communication.

Precedent & Future Scraping

• Some fear a “bad precedent” that could chill web scraping, archiving, and even AI training data collection.
• Others argue the ruling is narrow: reselling plus unauthorized authenticated access, not generic scraping of public pages.
• Outcome: only $5,000 in damages, but potential for injunctions and future penalties is viewed as the real deterrent.