A federal judge threw out an anti-trust case brought by airlines passengers who accuse internet provider GoGo of illegally raising the price of in-flight service to rates as high as $17.95.<\/p>\n
In a decision issued Wednesday in San Francisco, US District Judge Edward Chen ruled that GoGo, despite supplying 85% of all internet-equipped airplanes in the US, does not have a monopoly. The company’s customers include\u00a0Alaska Airlines, American Airlines, Delta, US Airways, and Virgin America.<\/p>\n
In throwing out the case, Chen accepted GoGo’s argument that it doesn’t have dominant market share because it covers only 16% of all US airplanes, and it’s possible for the remaining planes, which do not offer internet, to sign up with a competing service provider. The internet contracts are sold on airplane-by-airplane basis, and not across entire airlines.<\/p>\n
The passengers sued GoGo in October, claiming that competitor Row44 charges only $5 for an entire flight of internet service but that airlines can’t drop GoGo because of ten-year contracts that lock them in. They also argue that GoGo’s internet technology is inferior because it relies on ground-to-air tower transmission rather than the satellite service offered by Row44 and Jet Blue’s ViaSat service.<\/p>\n
The decision also agreed to GoGo’s request to acknowledge that a third provider, Panasonic, is entering the market with satellite service on United.<\/p>\n
Chen dismissed the case without prejudice, meaning the passengers can try to bring up new facts to show that GoGo does have a monopoly. You can read the decision yourself below.<\/p>\n
To understand the science of in-flight internet, see\u00a0”Why your in-flight WiFi is slow and expensive<\/a>” by my colleague Stacey Higginbotham.<\/p>\n