GigaOM » Virgin America

More iPads take to the sky with Qantas in-flight trial

Darrell Etherington — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 14:17:01 +0000

Apple is doing very well in airplanes that crisscross our skies, thanks to the iPad. It is not only being used by airline staff at United to replace paper manuals and charts but is also now being tested by Qantas to replace existing in-flight entertainment options.

A new Qantas trial pilot program will see one of the airline’s Boeing 767-300 jets outfitted with one iPad 2 for each passenger, according to the Australian Business Traveller. Each of the aircraft’s 254 seats will have its own iPad 2, and there will also be several spares kept on hand just in case. All seats pockets will carry an iPad 2, but business-class travelers will also get a flexible stand to use with their fold-out meal tray.

The iPads won’t be tethered to seats, but they will carry a software theft deterrent of sorts: Each boots directly into and only has access to Qantas’ proprietary Q Streaming app, which provides access to its in-flight entertainment library over Wi-Fi but which is also rendered useless upon leaving the plane.

The pilot program is about testing Qantas’ in-flight Wi-Fi streaming capabilities, Qantas Executive Manager for Customer Experience Alison Webster told the ABT. The ultimate goal is to be able to provide passengers with access to the Q Streaming service through their own devices, be they Apple’s iPads and iPhones or Android tablets and handsets.

If the initial test proves a success, Qantas plans to expand it to ten Boeing 767-300 jets, complete with iPad brackets installed in seat backs. Passengers who opt to use their own devices will also have the option of downloading a video to watch within 24 hours of leaving a plane, should they land before they finish their show or movie.

With iPads in the cockpit and iPads in the cabin, the air travel industry is becoming a perfect use case of how Apple’s devices appeal to companies for both consumer-facing and internal business use. Let’s hope Qantas’ example catches on here in North America and in the rest of the world, too. That shouldn’t be too tall of an order, since Q Streaming is based on the same technology that powers Virgin America’s just-announced in-flight entertainment system.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Katy Pearce

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

No phone or laptop? Virgin America to add Wi-Fi to seat-back displays

Erica Ogg — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 20:11:11 +0000

Virgin America was the first U.S. airline to add the option of in-flight Wi-Fi, a handy feature to be able to work online or check Twitter if you had a smartphone, tablet or laptop with you. Now the tech-savvy airline is taking it up a notch by announcing its plans to make some Wi-Fi connectivity available through a new in-flight entertainment system. It’s not coming out until next year, but this is great news for owners of feature phones or those who travel without gadgets but still want to get online during a flight.

Virgin is going to upgrade the current Red in-flight entertainment system with help from a product built by Lufthansa, the airline said on Tuesday at an industry conference in Seattle. The new system will be “entirely interactive, connective and entertaining” and will “have content and services offered both via the seat-back system and guests’ personal electronic devices,” according to Virgin. The announcement is low on specifics, but it adds that there will be an option for passengers to connect their own devices to this new in-flight platform.

It does sound like the seat-back systems will be connected to the web but in a limited fashion. A company spokesperson said there should be “some Wi-Fi connectivity” in the seat-back system, including access to social media apps — which, if we had to guess, sounds like it could include at least the ability to check Facebook and/or Twitter from your seat back but maybe not free access to any website.

The airline says that the Wi-Fi option available to passengers who bring their own Wi-Fi-ready gadgets is already popular and “regularly sees up to one-third of guests on flights logged on.” And that’s a service they have to pay for. So it stands to reason that plenty of people will be interested in logging on, even if it’s limited, and especially if it’s free.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

Telecommuter Taxes: Commentary on the Recent Telebright Case

Nicole Goluboff — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 22:00:16 +0000

New Jersey’s Tax Court recently ruled that Maryland-based Telebright Corporation was required to file New Jersey Corporation Business Tax returns when the firm’s only link to New Jersey was its employment of a telecommuter there. The decision has both positive and negative implications for telework: The court displayed enlightened understanding of telecommuting, treating it as important commercial activity benefiting both employers and employees. However, it also approved a tax policy likely to discourage non-New Jersey employers from offering New Jersey residents telecommuting arrangements, shackling the use of telework — and potentially employment — in that state.

New Jersey is not the only state claiming authority to tax a nonresident company simply
because the firm employs an in-state telecommuter. While uncertainty remains about how
states will handle individual cases, the inclination of many state tax departments to assert this
authority is concerning. The trend threatens telecommuting’s growth nationally at a time when the country urgently needs to use it more — to create jobs, conserve oil, decrease carbon emissions and assure business continuity during emergencies, for example.

States facing cases like Telebright should adopt the New Jersey Tax Court’s progressive
understanding of telework. However, they should draw a different conclusion from that
understanding and resist taxing out-of-state employers whose only connection, or “nexus,” to
the state is a limited tele-workforce.

Overview of Telebright

Srisathya Thirumalai was a Maryland resident Telebright employed to write software code. When Thirumalai relocated to New Jersey, the firm retained her as a telecommuter. Telebright had no other employees in New Jersey and did not file New Jersey Corporation Business Tax returns. The Division of Taxation determined it should, because, by employing Thirumalai in New Jersey, Telebright was “doing business” there. Telebright argued before the New Jersey Tax Court that it was not “doing business” within the meaning of New Jersey’s Corporation Business Tax Act (CBT Act) and that subjecting the company to the Act would violate the U.S. Constitution’s Due Process and Commerce Clauses. The court rejected both claims.

The court also noted that a federal statute limiting states’ power to tax the income of
certain nonresident companies was inapplicable. The statute — P.L. 86-272 — bars states from
taxing out-of-state businesses that restrict their in-state activities to soliciting orders for sales
of tangible personal property, as long as the orders are both approved and filled from outside
the state. Because Thirumalai did not solicit orders, P.L. 86-272 did not shield Telebright from
taxation.

The Ruling’s Pros and Cons

The Telebright court rightly treated cross-border telework as a profitable business practice useful to both employers and workers, and the court also underscored the legitimacy of a home office as a worksite. Courts nationwide should embrace the Tax Court’s advanced appreciation of telework.

However, the court’s decision also jeopardizes the growth of telework in New Jersey, harming both the state’s residents and its economy. Companies outside New Jersey concerned about taxation there may well refuse to allow either current or prospective employees from New Jersey to telework. By decreasing telework opportunities, the policy approved in Telebright can also limit employment in the state.

Say someone from New Jersey cannot find in-state work but receives a job offer from a Maryland firm. When her home sale efforts prove futile, she proposes telecommuting. Because the company has no other connection to New Jersey and wants to avoid taxation there, it denies her request. She must turn the job down, needlessly prolonging her unemployment. When New Jersey residents remain jobless for a sustained period, the state clearly loses. Personal income tax revenue falls. Because unemployed people have less to spend, sales tax revenue falls. Reduced sales can cause reduced business income tax revenue. A tax policy undoubtedly intended to raise revenue can easily backfire.

The Trend Telebright Illustrates

Other states, too, are asserting that telecommuters within the state who conduct non-solicitation activities may create income tax obligations for their nonresident employers. Responding to a recent Bureau of National Affairs (BNA) survey, thirty-five states said that a nonresident company’s employment of a non-soliciting telecommuter within the state would, by itself, subject the company to income tax liability (BNA, Inc., Special Report: 2010 Survey of State Tax Departments, Vol. 17, No. 4, April 23, 2010).

However, whether a state would tax a nonresident company in any particular case is not completely clear: “[G]uidance, in the form of case law or statutes setting forth the types of activities that trigger nexus and taxability, is lacking in many states.” Although the survey “fills in essential details,” because “nexus determinations are fact-specific and subject to interpretation, the states’ answers should not be relied upon as definitive policy statements,” BNA says.

To harness telecommuting’s many benefits, states should adopt the Telebright court’s view of interstate telework as interstate commerce profiting employers and employees alike. However, states should not — as the Telebright court did — deter telework by requiring nonresident companies to file income tax returns just because they hire a single resident to telecommute. Even a small group of telecommuters should not trigger tax liability. Rather than saddling nonresident employers with extra tax burdens if they hire some in-state telecommuters, states should offer them tax breaks. Especially in the current economy, states should encourage businesses to hire their residents on terms that do not force the residents to move.

Nicole Goluboff is a lawyer and Advisory Board Member of the Telework Coalition, is the author of “The Law of Telecommuting,” “Telecommuting for Lawyers” and numerous articles on telework.

Photo by stock.xchng user djshaw

Related GigaOM Pro content (sub. req.): Enabling the Web Work Revolution

Good News: United To Offer Internet Wireless on NY-SF Flights

Om Malik — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:14:18 +0000

I was seriously thinking about giving up on United Airlines and my accumulated miles in favor of Virgin America for my transcontinental needs. After all, the idea of getting Internet access — however expensive it might be — when flying back and forth from New York made Virgin more appealing than free upgrades from United. Well, now I don’t have to do that. United will offer Aircell’s Gogo in-flight Internet access starting sometime in the second quarter of 2009. The service will be available to United customers traveling between New York’s JFK Airport and Los Angeles and San Francisco for a flat fee of $12.95. Gogo is now available on five North American airlines.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

In-Flight Broadband Cheat Sheet

Stacey Higginbotham — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:00:44 +0000

Updated: You just can’t keep the American urge to be productive down. Literally. That’s why in-flight Wi-Fi services get tech journalists and business travelers all excited, even as Congress tries to ban those pesky mobile phone calls on planes. I kind of like being forced to read a book, but the siren song of a blog post will surely lead me to seek out in-flight Wi-Fi on my next trip to San Francisco. Please raise your seats backs to the upright position and check out our list of in-flight broadband options:

Today Delta is announcing in-flight Wi-Fi for all of its U.S. flights using the Gogo service from Aircell. The service will cost $9.95 for a flight that’s three hours or less and $12.95 for flights that are more than three hours (Aircell’s set rate). As direct flights decrease, many travelers will likely get stuck paying twice – -for each leg of the flight — but if I can watch Hulu instead of the in-flight movie it might be worth it. Wait, I’m supposed to be working. A Delta spokesman says the service will debut on East Coast flights first and cover the Delta fleet by mid-2009.
American Airlines said in August of 2007 that it would provide in-fight Wi-Fi to folks traveling on jets used mostly on transcontinental routes. Last month it said it would trial the service (it’s also using Aircell) in 15 jets. It has tested the service on flights traveling from New York to Los Angeles and San Francisco as well as on New York and Miami flights.
Virgin America offers in-flight Wi-Fi on transcontinental flights via Aircell as well, and is still in the testing phase. Update: Virgin says they will have Wi-Fi for customers (the crew already has it) on several planes by the end of the year and fleet wide by the end of March 2009. Pricing has yet to be determined.
Southwest Airlines is planning satellite-based Wi-Fi on four of its planes this summer, but we’re still waiting to hear more details.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.