Their sail might provide some lift, true, but they also apply rotation and shearing forces around the (double) container like a lever.
See here [0]: "The MAIB’s preliminary assessment found that [the ship]’s violent pitching and ploughing into the heavy seas resulted in a rapid loss of speed and heading control, which exposed the deck cargo to green sea forces capable of overwhelming the maximum loading of the container securing arrangements... corrosion to the vessel’s deck cargo securing arrangements may have contributed to the scale of the loss."
Or here [1]: "At 0800, the ship sailed from Xiamen with 6,466 containers on board... At about 1000, the bosun and four deck crew mustered at the forward end of the weather deck and began a post-departure inspection of the deck cargo securing arrangements... they checked that the manual twistlocks, connecting the first tier of containers to the hatch covers, were locked, and ensured that the container lashing rods were correctly tensioned. With over 12,000 twistlocks and 3000 lashings to inspect, the checks continued all day"
[0]:https://www.gov.uk/maib-reports/loss-of-34-containers-overbo...
[1]: https://www.gov.uk/maib-reports/loss-of-cargo-containers-ove...
I think they must have said they stay put is under weight and the lashings just keep them from slipping? Who knows, I'm definitely wrong here.
Love how this idea has energized HN.
Also, sails apply lift, so upwards pull. I know nothing about sail physics, but this claim is in the OP.
Since port stays are very costly, you won't deploy this for anything shorter than a transatlantic voyage anyways. So the double-wide setup seems less of an issue.