Definition: Given a real-life anecdote of a complex ethical situation, generate a suitable title that describes the main event/root cause of the situation. Imagine that the given text is a social media post, and you have to write the title of the post, so the users can decide to read the main text or not.
Input: My family has had a system for as long as I can remember that works as follows: 

On a communal device, one can limit the current user's turn to 30 more minutes by giving a warning.

My brother is now refusing to follow this system, going so far as to lie and state that the communal device is his personal PC.

I do have a personal PC, but the crux of the argument is that this communal PC is the only one with a VR system hooked up and the only one that could have one hooked up to it due to space constraints. 

Admittedly I'm not totally blameless: his argument is that he's playing with a friend who has a 2 hour limited timespan, however I gave the warning coincidentally 30 minutes before they got on. Rather than give me my 30 minutes immediately and then explaining the situation, he chose to play solo for that 30 minutes and THEN complain when I returned to claim my turn. He then proceeded to argue for a full hour claiming that he had an inherent right to use my *personal* PC to play his game. During this tine, I could have gotten my half hour and then he'd have the entire remaining timespan to play with his friend. Despite this, he has refused to admit his own lack of foresight so I'm settling this once and for all: AITA?

forcing my brother to follow an established system