Arbitration clauses must be made illegal
Or at least reasonable.
It’s perfectly reasonable for, say, a tattoo artist not to be liable for the medical bills, if the ink causes a hitherto unknown allergy to kick in.
It’s not reasonable to argue that a streaming service agreement covers liability for being cut in half by a train.
There has to be a reasonable understanding of the underlying risks that are covered. Some things are just inherently risky, and if the buyer knows and understands that, she can agree on taking that risk. Otherwise, no doctor would ever touch any patient ever again.
yeah, that work like a trap.
Sign up for one service with arbitrate … that would apply for all service.
People don’t realize how important the outcome of this court case will be.
Man, america is wild place. Do you have any laws there?
Our laws protect what’s important to lawmakers, the giant corporations and billionaires.
And laws that do protect the little guys get ignored by our right-wing courts. For instance, the courts quit enforcing the Sherman Antitrust Act because, in the words of Scalia, “it makes no economic sense.”
Most Americans would be offended by your comment, and that’s why we don’t have nice things. We’re very, and I can not stress this enough, VERY stupid.
It’s the law that the businesses get to screw you.
Oh yeah and every infant is assigned an assault weapon at birth.
Only the ones that are written for and protected by corporations. Everything else is the wild Wild West.
It will likely be dismissed as Disney wasn’t the company responsible for staffing or managing the restaurant.
Which sucks, because I desperately want to see Disney take another massive L in the spotlight of the mainstream news cycle.
It’s gonna be nuts.
It’s certainly going to cause a reaction.
Make sure to pirate all Disney media instead of consuming it legally so that you can sue them if they try to kill you.
Jesus… You’re not wrong. That’s fucking crazy. You’re NOT wrong. Wtf is wrong with my country?
That’s what I don’t get about this. The point is either to get out of paying or at least make it very difficult. At the same time the cost to Disney as a company with all the bad press and fall out from doing this would be orders of magnitude greater than simply paying the widower compensation. Who signed off on it? The idea that a lawyer can do what ever it takes to win a case while simultaneously destroying the company they work for seems dumb as shit from a purely financial point of view.
Disney allowed to kill your spouse because you watched the mandalorian
The dark arts of the mouse are a pathway to legal techniques some consider to be… unnatural.
Now that Google is officially an Illigal monopoly, can Disney be next?
You really think Disney has a monopoly on evil?
A monopoly on evil no, a monopoly yes
It would cost Disney literally pocket change to compensate the widower, but instead they rather spend hundred of thousands of dollars for lawyers and legal fee to fight it.
They’re using this chance since they know they can easily dispute it to try and set precedent for terms and services being used in situations that don’t make sense.
The judge will probably slap it down and they can still say that they don’t have anything to do with the restaurant and just walk away free, but it’s worth trying cause there’s plenty pro corpo judges now a days.
Piracy is the safe option then. Got it.
Piracy, watching through a friend, BluRays & DVDs, hard copies & actually owning something as opposed to…perpetually renting access, owning nothing & being happy about it.
How can a streaming service agreement apply to a restaurant
in a park?This is why those ToS are 71pages long. I don’t think there are many good judges out there anymore, but I hope the one that reviews this case goes absolutely ape-shit on Disney. There is a legal tradition of harsh punishments for criminals in examplar cases to set detterents to future crimes. The same needs to be done to reel in these corporations.
FWIW, I don’t think the judge is going to go for it. Disney’s lawyers are the most bloodthirsty son of a bitch lawyers on Earth, but just because they make the argument doesn’t mean the court will accept it.
Disney said late Wednesday that it is “deeply saddened” by the family’s loss but stressed the Irish pub is neither owned nor operated by the company. The company’s stance in the litigation doesn’t affect the plaintiff’s claims against the eatery, it added.
“We are merely defending ourselves against the plaintiff’s attorney’s attempt to include us in their lawsuit against the restaurant,” the company wrote in an emailed statement.
For some reason that word “merely” just gets right under my skin. Like they KNOW it’s peak slimy, but they are just trying to do their job, man.
…Which is to protect the company at the expense of anything else: Reason, decency, consumer rights…
Meanwhile, even though D+ wants to apply their TOS to the theme parks, if you buy a D+ gift card, those funds cannot be used at any of the theme parks lol.
I can’t believe this is even a fucking thing
There’s no way this gets dismissed, right? The precedent this would set would be unimaginable…
I dunno, it depends on how many supreme court justices disney can afford I guess.
How the fuck is it not punishable to write stuff into those contracts that contradict the law (obv. i mean this past a certain company size). Like for real.
Edit: Typo
I don’t know what the exact agreement here is, but such things are very often not enforceable. You can’t have someone sign their rights away. You can have them sign the document, but that document will be worthless in court and will not be respected. Those are more to scare people and discourage them from suing the company.
not enforceable
I mean sure, but writing agreements that contradict the law, at least in some of the more egregious cases, should really be actively punishable.
Those are more to scare people and discourage them from suing the company.
And this is why.
Chat? This isn’t a chat room :P I guess it’s a forum, now that I think about it!
Feck Disney, by the by, bloody awful how evil they are :-(
asking “chat” for feedback is a tiktok meme. chat is @[email protected] out of touch? ;)
I’m ancient apparently. Referring to chat always comes to my head as livestreaming on twitch.
You’re correct. Imitating this sort of speech even outside of Twitch is essentially the meme. The joke is that streamers get so inebriated with talking to the chat that even when no chat exists in real-life they still reflectively reference it. This meme started on TikTok but it has spread into general Gen Z pop culture.
