Paul Kelly
Verified Rep - BR Fares
Link here if you can read German: https://www.hessenschau.de/wirtscha...n-in-bahn-app-v3,olg-db-suchfunktion-100.html
The gist of it is that a private train operator complained to the regional court in Frankfurt-am-Main about the fact that the journey planning algorithm that Deutsche Bahn's app and website uses (provided I think by Hafas) will by default not show overtaken journeys, even though it shows other journeys which arrive much later than the overtaken journeys. The court decided that this was misleading and unfair and ordered it to be changed.
E.g. consider the following sequence of departures from York to King's Cross:

The Grand Central journey would never be shown because it is overtaken by 1 minute by an LNER service. The example used by the court was that when searching for a departure from 10:00 onwards, the algorithm might show a journey departing 10:20 taking 1 hour, followed by a journey departing 10:30 taking 2 hours. However it would never show a journey departing 10:10 departing only 1 and a half hours. When you look at it that way, in my opinion the court's decision does look kind of reasonable, although the algorithm seems to have been working as intended! Quite interesting to see something like this being discussed in a court when usually it is such a niche topic!
The gist of it is that a private train operator complained to the regional court in Frankfurt-am-Main about the fact that the journey planning algorithm that Deutsche Bahn's app and website uses (provided I think by Hafas) will by default not show overtaken journeys, even though it shows other journeys which arrive much later than the overtaken journeys. The court decided that this was misleading and unfair and ordered it to be changed.
E.g. consider the following sequence of departures from York to King's Cross:

The Grand Central journey would never be shown because it is overtaken by 1 minute by an LNER service. The example used by the court was that when searching for a departure from 10:00 onwards, the algorithm might show a journey departing 10:20 taking 1 hour, followed by a journey departing 10:30 taking 2 hours. However it would never show a journey departing 10:10 departing only 1 and a half hours. When you look at it that way, in my opinion the court's decision does look kind of reasonable, although the algorithm seems to have been working as intended! Quite interesting to see something like this being discussed in a court when usually it is such a niche topic!