the parable of the prodigal son revisited

from Wikipedia:

    In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus tells the story of a man has two sons. The younger demands his share of his inheritance while his father is still living, and goes off to a distant country where he "waste[s] his substance with riotous living", and eventually has to take work as a Swineherd. There he comes to his senses, and determines to return home and throw himself on his father's mercy. But when he returns home, his father greets him with open arms, and hardly gives him a chance to express his repentance; he kills a "fatted calf" to celebrate his return. The older brother becomes angry, apparently jealous at the favored treatment of his faithless brother and upset at the lack of reward for his own faithfulness. But the father responds:

"Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine. It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found. "(Luke 15:32, KJV)

The parable deals unconditional forgiveness even without demonstration of repentance; though some people would argue that the simple fact that the younger son came back is already a sign of repentance.

Here's a question: what if the prodigal son went back yet continued his ways using his father's resources? Would the eldest child be justified for kicking his brother's ass off their land? Should the elder brother start expecting that the younger conform to the house rules?