> The only question you really have to ask here is, "am I tricking a business into offering me something with a dollar value without paying for it?" Yes? That's fraud. It's the definition of fraud.
What services did he steal? He paid for wifi services for the duration of the flight. The device by which he enjoys that service should be of no consequence.
He paid for wifi services for his computer for the duration of the flight. The fact that you do not recognize the legitimacy of a commercial offering does not give you the right to invent your own terms; you take the terms as offered, or you don't do business at all.
He paid for a WiFi connection between a device and the internet. He received a connection between a device and the internet.
If GoGo can't tell the difference between a laptop and a mobile phone, that's their problem. And no, the UA string doesn't guarantee that and there is no law that I've heard of that prevents users from altering their UA string (or anything for that matter). They showed him a price for a service on his device, and he bought that service.
Ha, good luck trying to argue that. The Gogo website makes it clear that there are separate services for phones and laptops. Their website automatically detects what kind of device you have, if they make a mistake then it's their problem if they don't offer you the means to correct it. But if you deliberately circumvent their system to save money, then you're committing a fraud.
I'd urge you to learn a little more about the law if you think that a UA string specific law is needed, or even a computer-specific law. Intent and personal gain are more an enough.
What services did he steal? He paid for wifi services for the duration of the flight. The device by which he enjoys that service should be of no consequence.