A class action lawsuit accuses JetBlue Airways of employing “surveillance pricing,” using customer data to dynamically adjust ticket prices based on individual willingness to pay.

Lawsuit Details and Allegations

The core allegation centers around JetBlue systematically collecting customers’ personal data – including browsing history and online behavior – to inflate ticket prices. This practice leverages artificial intelligence to gauge a customer’s willingness to pay, potentially resulting in different prices for the same flight.

Origin of the Complaint

The lawsuit originated from a passenger’s complaint on X (formerly Twitter) on April 18th. The passenger reported a $230 price increase for a flight ticket within 24 hours, calling it “crazy.”

JetBlue’s Response and Controversy

JetBlue’s initial response to the passenger – suggesting clearing browser cache and cookies or using incognito mode – fueled the controversy. The lawsuit argues this implies the airline connects browsing data to ticket prices.

JetBlue’s Defense

JetBlue vehemently denies the allegations, stating fares are determined solely by supply and demand and seat availability. The airline attributes the customer service representative’s suggestion to an isolated error in judgment.

FTC Investigation and Broader Concerns

The lawsuit follows a recent Federal Trade Commission (FTC) investigation into surveillance pricing. In January, the FTC found numerous retailers were using personal data to establish individualized prices.

FTC Findings

The FTC discovered retailers were quietly utilizing tracking cookies and browsing history to create fluctuating prices based on factors like time of day, shopper profile, and device. Consumers are often unaware of this dynamic pricing.

Legal Action and Potential Impact

The lawsuit was officially filed in a Brooklyn, New York federal court on Wednesday, seeking damages and an injunction to prevent the alleged practice. Plaintiffs argue JetBlue’s actions harm consumers, undermine competition, and erode trust.

The case is expected to draw attention from consumer advocacy groups and regulators, potentially setting a precedent for data use in pricing strategies.