this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2025
1038 points (99.5% liked)

Not The Onion

18631 readers
797 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In August 2025, two nearly identical lawsuits were filed: one against United (in San Francisco federal court) and one against Delta Air Lines (in Brooklyn federal court). They claim that each airline sold more than one million “window seats” on aircraft such as the Boeing 737, Boeing 757, and Airbus A321, many of which are next to blank fuselage walls rather than windows.

Passengers say they paid seat-selection fees (commonly $30 to $100+) expecting a view, sunlight, or the comfort of a genuine window seat — and say they would not have booked or paid extra had they known the seat lacked a window.

As reported by Reuters, United’s filing argues that it never promised a view when it used the label “window” for a seat. According to the airline, “window” refers only to the seat’s location next to the aircraft wall, not a guarantee of an exterior view.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 7 points 10 hours ago

Maybe they should use AI to tell them what a fucking window is. If it only promises a fuselage seat then it should say fuselage seat and not window seat. Friggin scammers.

[–] COASTER1921@lemmy.ml 8 points 17 hours ago

As someone who picks a window seat specifically for the view I agree the airline websites need to make this clearer but it's super common to allow for air ducts in the plane. If you check the seat map on Aerolopa this is easily avoided (except when there's an aircraft swap). Avoid SeatGuru, it's often very outdated and even when correct for seats the window positions are incorrect.

[–] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Are their no small claims tribunals in the US? This refund would be over so quickly in Australia and no doubt the ACCC would be on their arse.

We barely do anything about monopolies here these these days, but at least false advertising and right to refunds are rock solid.

Also, those seat selection fees are crazy. International flights I've seen like $8, maybe $15 if you're getting really crazy.

Who in the world is paying $100 to select their seat?

[–] dnick@sh.itjust.works 6 points 17 hours ago

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.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] baggachipz@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 hours ago

Conversely, if you file small claims against a large corporation, chances are they won’t show up and you’ll win by default. But yeah it would take more time than it’s worth. So really it would only be out of spite.

[–] Bakkoda@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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.

[–] nomylous@lemmy.today 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I agree with the sentiment but this definitely didn't begin with Dump. We've been getting increasingly fucked by corpos for decades, Cheeto is just the most recent.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago

Yeah, but Democrats were at least doing things like creating the Consumer Protection Bureau (which Trump has since killed)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sunflier@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

So, basically they're trying to get us ready for these standing seats.

The regulatory requirements to make standing airline seats possible have not been met in either Europe or North America, and they're unlikely to ever be satisfied—unless government oversight finally becomes so corrupt and useless that this concept is forced through.

Under this administration?

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago

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

So next week, you're saying?

[–] Jumbie@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 day ago

Standing is a historical torture method.

Must we now also pay for the privilege?

[–] fossilesque@mander.xyz 5 points 1 day ago

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.

[–] AnitaAmandaHuginskis@lemmy.world 81 points 1 day ago (5 children)

"War is peace"

That's what they are trying to pull. Look it up.

According to the airline, “window” refers only to the seat’s location next to the aircraft wall

Then call it "wall seat"

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] dan1101@lemmy.world 386 points 2 days ago (21 children)

If the seat doesn't include a window then it needs to be called a wall seat. This is an open and shut case of false advertising.

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

why do people even use this company? I dont think i have ever read anything positive about it.

[–] DigitalAudio@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

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

[–] brax@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

And kill pets, but I don't think anybody wrote a three part song about that one lol

[–] trashboat@midwest.social 4 points 1 day ago

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

[–] popekingjoe@lemmy.world 217 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (6 children)

This is so fucking dumb. It has that "boneless wings can contain bones" judgement energy from Ohio awhile back. 🤦🏻

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 103 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (11 children)

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.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] axexrx@lemmy.world 46 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The agreement was im paying 355 dolars for a window seat. If 'window seat' just refers to the location, then dolars just refers to the fact its an amount of currency, and ill have my bank adjust the payment to reflect that was in pesos.

[–] acchariya@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

By dollars, I mean Zimbabwe dollars

[–] Diddlydee@feddit.uk 9 points 1 day ago

What's beside the aisle seats? Could it perchance be aisle on every single one? Hmm.

[–] MourningDove@lemmy.zip 63 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Cool. So since the government is going to side with this bullshit: I say that “income tax” doesn’t mean a tax on my income.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 day ago

This scam already exists. That's why Jeff Bezos pays a much lower rate on what is - bullshit aside - his income.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Plurrbear@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Wouldn’t that be the definition of, “Bait and switch”??? Which is already illegal?

You PAY EXTRA for a WINDOW SEAT and there’s no window?! Why would someone pay more then? What would be the point of paying more if there’s no “window” seems very cut and dry! That’s like paying extra for an aisle seat and get a middle seat, that’s NEVER in question, they are just trying to get people’s money! Savages!

This just proves don’t fly United nor Delta… which they are already super high priced anyways…

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 day ago (7 children)

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.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 73 points 1 day ago (4 children)

And this is why the civil court system is just plain broken. Despite the astronomical cost of taking this upsurd stance in court, it is worth it. Thier needs to be damages assesed for the absurdity of the logic used to force something to cost more court time than it should get.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] buttnugget@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago (7 children)

They’d be right if that’s how people referred to the outer seats, but it’s not. It’s not like “boneless chicken wings” where you know it’s not an actual deboned chicken wing. There is no question that people say window seat to mean a seat next to a window and not the opposite of an aisle seat.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 1 points 20 hours ago

Of all the horrible air travel experiences I've had, my absolute worst was an eleven hour flight from Narita to Pearson on a United 747.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 52 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Would a reasonable person assume that is what it meant? Probably not. United should lose this case.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] DJKJuicy@sh.itjust.works 40 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I mean, don't charge extra for something then not deliver it. Seems cut and dry.

If the aisle/middle/window in coach all cost the same price then no one would have any standing to sue. The airlines charged customers extra. They did this to themselves.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] adespoton@lemmy.ca 107 points 1 day ago (6 children)

I remember back when the seats actually aligned with the windows on airplanes, such that you could sit in a seat and look out the window.

Then they started shoving more rows of seats in. Over the past 20 years or so, I’ve often got a “window seat” where the nearest window is positioned directly beside the seat in front, where nobody can open or close the cover without fully reclining (ha) the seat, and there’s zero view because of the angle.

Technically still a window seat, as there IS a window nearby, but not what you’d expect coming from any other mode or era of transport.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] WFloyd@lemmy.world 73 points 1 day ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›