Royal Caribbean Tells Family To Abandon Ship [Nightmares]

 

here are few things in life more decadent and luxurious than a cruise vacation. Unless of course, you are on a Royal Caribbean cruise and your child gets a cold, and then a paranoid crew kicks you and your family off the ship at night in your pajamas at a foreign port where you then have to spend thousands dollars for passports and tickets to get home. It sounds like a nightmare but that's exactly what happened to this Florida family according to WFTV. Read the details of their misadventure inside

Last Monday night, The Cortes family boarded the Majesty of the Seas for what was supposed to be a lavish, 5-night cruise. On Tuesday, the Cortes' 7-month-old Zoie, starting getting ill and the ship's doctor was dispatched. With symptoms of vomiting and diarrhea, little Zoie was diagnosed with dehydration and the doctor said she needed immediate treatment, but off the ship. According to the family, a security guard gave them 10 minutes to pack their bags and leave the ship. "I asked if my wife could get out of her pajamas and there was no time for that. We had to leave," said Luis Cortes. The Cortes' speculate that the doctor suspected Norwalk virus since Zoie exhibited similar symptoms to the virus.

At11pm the Cortes' rapidly disembarked into Nassau and sought treatment at a local emergency room. However, Zoie was diagnosed with a cold, not the Norwalk virus. Additionally, the family said she had seasickness. The Nassau doctor deemed Zoie fit for travel, however the cruise ship had already left. "We had to find our way to the U.S. Embassy. All of this on foot. A family of five in this town we knew nothing about," said Cortes. The expenses that ensued were to the tune of $3000 for the cost of the emergency room, emergency passports, and plane tickets back to Florida. Royal Caribbean responded to WFTV saying that they were concerned because the child was so young and didn't want to take chances. Royal Caribbean is giving the family free vouchers for another trip, but will not reimburse the cost of the passports and tickets "because the family didn't purchase trip insurance."

We're not impressed, Royal Caribbean. It's difficult to understand why you would have to kick a family off the boat within 10 minutes because of a case of "dehydration." And now you won't even pay for the family's trip back to Florida? We would think that the reimbursement would be a small amount compared to the money you could be losing from any passenger with a slight cough who may now be afraid to board your ships. We understand that Norwalk virus is the bane of cruise ships but your knee-jerk reaction put this family through a boat-load of unnecessary grief. What would have happened if the ship was at sea? Plank time?

Family Says Cruise Ship Kicked Them Off Boat Because Child Was Sick [WFTV]
(Photo:Getty Images)

Single Mother Gets RIAA Suit Dismissed, Sues Them Right Back [Justice]

 

Now here's something we love to see: Tanya Andersen, a 45-year-old single mother, is taking on the RIAA for their sleazy tactics and appears to be winning. After being sued for piracy and having the case dismissed, she decided to go ahead and sue the RIAA for conspiracy. She argues that the way the RIAA snoops around looking for people to sue is in violation of the law, as is the way they try to extort settlements out of people without going to trial. BusinessWeek has a whole profile of Andersen and her battle against the RIAA, and it's well worth the read. Go check it out; it's not like you've got other stuff to do. [BusinessWeek via CrunchGear]

If you thought AT&T's $2 fee to pay a bill ... [Fees]

 

If you thought AT&T's $2 fee to pay a bill in cash in-store was bad, wait till it goes up to $5. The price increase is scheduled for later this year. [Red Tape Chronicles]

Second Circuit: Plaintiffs Have Standing To Pursue Antitrust Case Alleging Collusion By Major Credit Card Companies To Require Arbitration And Ban Consumer Class Actions

 

by Brian Wolfman

The Second Circuit today issued Ross v. Bank of America, No. 06-04755 (Apr. 25 2008). In this case, the plaintiff credit card holders claimed that the defendant banks conspired in violation of section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act to include in their credit card contracts provisions that impose arbitration as the sole method of resolving disputes relating to the credit accounts and purport to ban class actions. The district court held that the plaintiffs lacked Article III standing, principally because the arbitration clauses had not been invoked against the plaintiffs. The Second Circuit reversed. The court held that because the case was based on an antitrust theory (and was not a challenge to the contract provisions themselves), the plaintiffs had suffered an Article III injury. The court noted, among other things, that the conspiracy to require arbitration and ban class actions had undermined the plaintiffs’ choice of contract provisions in the marketplace, and that limitation was a concrete and present injury. As the court of appeals put it, a “card that limits the holder to arbitration is less valuable (all other factors being equal) than a card that offers the holder a choice between court action or arbitration.” The opinion is only 15 pages and is written in plain English. Definitely worth a look.

Did Comcast Lie to Me About Slowing Down P2P Traffic? [Comcast]

 

When I was talking to Comcast for my round up of ISP network management practices (pre-BT deal), we talked a lot about how they manage p2p traffic, and they were very clear that the temporary slowdowns were "surgical," (their word) and only employed during heavy congestion. So I'd been using that caveat anytime I brought it up, out of fairness. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin told a Senate committee this week that what Comcast told me wasn't true: "It does not appear that this technique was used only to occasionally delay traffic at particular nodes suffering from network congestion at that time."

He continues that "Based on testimony we've received thus far, this equipment was typically deployed over a wider geographic area or system, and is not even capable of knowing when an individual ... segment of the network is congested."

Honestly,the Comcast/P2P/net neutrality story is a bit played out, and frustrating, because nothing material has really happened, and I'm actually sort of tired of it. The major reason I'm posting this is because I was specifically told something by Comcast PR—which I gave the benefit of the doubt, because while PR cajoles and spruces, they rarely intentionally deceive—which the chairman of the FCC is stating to be categorically untrue. That's unfortunate, and disconcerting.

While we should always fact check, we shouldn't have to worry about being lied to. I'm waiting for them to get back to me, and I hope there's just some mixed signals going on here, but their response to Computerworld, that doesn't flat-out deny Martin's accusations, isn't very reassuring. [Computerworld via /.]