United argues 'window seat' does not mean 'seat with a window'

Or at least put a monitor running Microsoft.

They'll try and argue that it's just the generic term that is most familiar to their customers, not a specific definition of what you will find if you take that seat. "Aisle" "middle" and "window" are just commonly-accepted shorthand for the first, second, and third seats in a row, not prescriptive definitions.

Source: I once worked for a Extended Warranty company and they do the exact same crap. The product they sold is a service contract, it has nothing whatsoever to do with actually extending your existing warranty. But they were allowed to keep calling it an "extended warranty" and use that term predominantly and market off it, because that is the term that is in common usage for the product they sell. All they had to do was add tiny text at the bottom of the site that said "A service contract is often referred to as an “extended car warranty,” but it is not a warranty." 🤣🤣🤣 At worst, the airlines will have to do something like that.

It is a seat that is closest to the windows for the row. This is an open and shut case of common fucking sense

That case does at least make some sense. All meat products can contain bone due to them being from you know animals.

Basically they felt that encountering bones in a meat product is a normal, acceptable, and understood risk.

Now if he was give a plate of boneless wings and each wing was full of bones that would be a different case entirely.

This was an inadvertent bone fragment. Can happen in any meat product.

I am so tempted to open a wing shop in Columbus and wait for a Justice to come in so I could serve them boned "boneless style" wings.

Pizza is a vegetable

I didn't follow that story, but if it was over some suit over bone chips, I'd donlt think that it'd be analogous. Normally, "boneless wings" are less-desirable than regular wings. Boneless wings are just reconstituted chicken, so you can use scraps and stuff for them. It's kind of like the relationship between steak and hamburger.

But with hamburger, you can occasionally have a bone chip make it in.

That's in contrast to a window seat, where a window seat is often considered to be preferable, and someone not getting one would feel like they're being mislead as to the actual value of what they're getting.

Like, I wouldn't expect truth-in-advertising issues to come up with boneless chicken; you wouldn't likely wouldn't get boneless chicken wings because of an aversion to bone or something, where that's your main goal.

kagis

Yeah:

https://apnews.com/article/boneless-chicken-wings-lawsuit-ohio-supreme-court-231002ea50d8157aeadf093223d539f8

It doesn't sound like it's a false advertising case with the chicken, but a product safety one.

It has that “boneless wings can contain bones” judgement energy from Ohio awhile back

I'd be with ya, but the 'may' here happens through error; not through deception.

In my experience the window also isn't usable from the window seat unless you're really short. And the way the fuselage curves up at the side, there's also no shoulder room.

And newer planes all have windows where the tint is controlled by the crew (so as to minimize conflict between passengers) which... I still like to look out while stretching my legs near the bathroom but pretty sure staring out a ridiculously tinted window at some clouds isn't what people think of when they hear "window seat".

Like... I kinda agree that "window seat" doesn't actually mean you have a window these days. I would argue that they should be renamed but "wall seat" is going to just make people realize why aisle seats are the best choice... and I like my aisle seat so piss off.

It's like trying to call the non runway parts of airports ramps, aprons and taxiways. Because technically none of it is made with tarmac anymore but the general population is too stupid to go back so now that's what it's all called.

I too have a photo like that. ER-175J (OO) if I remember correctly.

reminds me of this meme:

"Sweet window seat, bro"

United, probably

dismiss with prejudice/disbar the lawyers that push these lawsuits at all

course, there are plenty of rigged court systems in the US that justify their whole existence via these sham lawsuits, so...

Yup. Make it 10x actual damages for this kind of bullshit. Then they'll stop, maybe.

Thier needs

Whose?

That's punitive damages, but they aren't punitive enough to discourage this behavior. The courts don't work for us.

Any person that saw an aircraft from the inside before probably. Some window seats are in between two windows, so technically they're double window seats.

cut and dry

By dollars, I mean Zimbabwe dollars

Aisle refers to the space between the rows. Every seat is an aisle seat.

/s

This one is infuriating. It's a legal measurement here, and when they go out and test in major cities the failure rate is very high.

A lot of places have switched to glass or sleeve though.

Ironically, that could be the technicality they're banking on. They aren't charging for the window seat - they're charging for the ability to select your own seat which is the same regardless of where you select.

No, I think any seat change costs the same price, no matter if you switch from window to somewhere, or from somewhere to window.

If airlines could get away with stacking people in there like a transatlantic slave ship they would do it.

As a mildly tall person, not even exceptionally tall, flying as it is already is borderline painful. The seat space is not built for anyone who isnt pint sized

Ryan Air has entered the chat.

https://www.euronews.com/business/2025/05/23/ryanair-denies-claims-flights-will-soon-offer-cheaper-standing-seats

This appears to be my local stadium!

There are small claims courts in the US.

Its a pain in the ass and you can't get extra damages or anything like that. So the most people would be entitled to was the 30-100 bucks they overpaid for their seat. It would also require each claimant to spend hours of their life preparing and doing it.

So instead they do class action, so it can all be on trial and anyone in the class can apply for a refund quickly if they win.

As soon as you can have a president tell people news is fake because he doesn't like it, words have no meaning and this is the result of interpretation in an authoritarian environment. The customer or end user has no recourse and there's is no loyalty or trust with the brand.

Seat selection, and it seems like every other friggin extra airline fee in the US, seems to be based on how full the flight is and how much people are willing to pay for it. 90% sure they are experimenting with it to the point where that fee will change just by refreshing the page and they likely have everything from $5-$200 'upgrade' fees based on what they've found they can get away with. Hell, I'm surprised they haven't started auctioning the seats while waiting to board. Maybe just typing this was a bad idea.

The main reason I like window seats isn’t because of the window, it’s because I can fall into deep sleep and nobody will wake me up because they need to get out and pee.

Well, yeah, that's what the controversy is. They're saying "window seat" implies sitting in the opposite of the aisle, not necessarily having a window. (Which is BS. People take it to mean window.) So they're saying it's not a bait and switch.

If you don't live in USA then I think yes that would be true, but in USA I'd imagine you're out of luck since I don't think USA is known for having the strongest consumer protections possible.

Standing is a historical torture method.

Must we now also pay for the privilege?

unless government oversight finally becomes so corrupt and useless that this concept is forced through.

So next week, you're saying?

Sweet, I have chronic pain in my foot and back and will likely have to fly several times a year again. I likely can't use these seats. So many people can't use these. I feel so bad for the elderly they'll try to strap in these.

Here me out: inside (aisle) middle, and outside (wall/window) seats.

I believe that all interior designs are customized in airplanes.

wait what? What's a boneless chicken wing then?

(Don't think I've ever heard that phrase but I'd assume it's a chicken wing with the bones removed)

Bulkhead is something different, those are the seats that are directly at the front of a section, behind a cabin wall. Some prefer those because they have a bit more legroom, but there's no under-seat storage (because there is a wall where the next seat would be), so carry-on storage is even more challenging.

Fuselage.

Lol, I cracked. Beautifully done.

They break guitars, for one. That's literally their company policy.

Unfortunately United’s the only affordable choice for a fair number of destinations

Past time

I'm going to grease up the blade ways

This is pretty standard, pretty much any big lawsuit will involve the sued party moving to dismiss at around this stage. Because why not? It might work, and even if it doesn't, it will cost the opposition money and energy to respond to.

What? No they don't.

Nah you're still allowed to open them to smoke

Nah you're still allowed to open them to smoke

I prefer the skin seat so I can sleep uninterrupted, but they should call it that, not a window seat.

Some people enjoy looking outside.

Try could also remove all the seats. People can sit on the floor or whatever. Just shove them in like cattle, and charge for window seats that have no windows or seats.

I would argue the other way. Not all airplanes have this, and unless you fly a lot you may not come across it, and if you do happen to notice, there's no reason to immediately assume that they would necessarily call them window seats. Lots of industries have 'common parlance' that many of their customers may not run into until it causes an issue, and blaming the confusion on the customer is unfair.

If anything, they should lose the case and be forced to modify their terminology to something like 'window side' seating or something. I mean you could easily argue that a 'window' seat doesn't necessarily give you a great view because it's over the wing or something, but to call it a window seat when it has no window is close to calling a hotel room a 'queen bed room' and then getting there and there's no bed, and claiming it's the same size as a room they would normally put a queen bed in. I mean what are you paying extra for if you pick a fake window seat? Maybe not having someone to the wall side of you, but at bare minimum they should be liable for charging extra while neglecting to mention it's a window seat with no window.

If nothing else, if you think a 'window seat with no window' seems like an odd phrase, and not an obvious thing sometime should say, then it's not being pedantic to call this out.

And it's almost pathetic that the way to solve this is through legislation.