If you couldn't be bothered to do the most basic research to get what you wanted, I don't know what to tell you. Does UA also owe you a refund if it's cloudy? Or if the aurora doesn't appear, or the flight path isn't what you expected, or you learned that mountains look less impressive than you expected from 15,000 feet directly above?

The passegners sat in the seat they paid for.

Nobody is questioning whether or not it is possible to display this information on the seating chart. Absolutely nobody. Nobody is claiming it's an IT issue. This is the straw-man-iest of all straw-man arguments. What I am saying is that it would cost millions of dollars to handle it properly when the inevitable tail swap occurs. UA isn't even particularly good at maintaining window vs. aisle. Now you're expecting them to navigate through a whole bunch of additional restrictions too, and you're adding a financial penalty if they fail.

If all you want is the display on the seatmap for the plane as it is currently assigned -- fine, it seems UA is moving that direction (ignoring for a moment the fact that UA doesn't assign specific plane types when the schedule opens). But it wouldn't have stopped the lawsuit; if anything, it would have strengthened it, by making it more feasible for somebody to claim that they selected a seat for a particular reason, and thus, when they didn't get it, they were irreparably harmed. "A flight attendant asked me to change seats to accommodate a family. Lawsuit!" "UA moved me out of the bulkhead row to accommodate someone with a mobility limitation. Lawsuit!"