[donna]

I would obey the law and leave the plane.

I respect private property.

[livius]

The problem is that you had already bought that seat, so the property was thus “yours” for the duration of the flight. Reneging on the contract between the buyer and the seller, which is essentially what United did, undermines all of mercantile law.

[packrat35]

Finally someone on FR posting sensiblely about this.

[fr_freak]

I would obey the law and leave the plane.

I respect private property.

Interesting. Do you respect contract law? Because that is what is at play here. The exchange of money for a service (and a seat) was a contract between Dao and the airline. The question at hand is whether United violated the terms of that contract by demanding that Dao leave AFTER he had already boarded. I say again, they may have violated the contract simply by demanding that Dao leave, regardless of the events that occurred upon his forced removal. This is what will determine the outcome of the lawsuit, and from what I've seen so far, United will lose and lose big.

[Electric Graffiti]

“I would obey the law and leave the plane.

I respect private property”

+1000. Apparently there are a lot of people who think that protesting and throwing a tantrum on board a plane is the way to go.

When this type of behavior is rewarded, expect a lot more of it to occur.

“Could you please stow your bag, sir...” FU, mind your own business. etc.

It will be a freak show free for all....chaos, delays,& increased costs. Brought to you by neo-jerk reactionary yentas with iphones and fakebook accounts