yeah, that work like a trap.
Sign up for one service with arbitrate ... that would apply for all service.
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
1545 points (98.3% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
9519 readers
867 users here now
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Disney probably doesn't care if this argument holds in a court of law. If it does, jackpot, they now have a get out of jail free card due to case law. Their main objective is to wear down the plaintiff financially or mentally so that they drop the case.
I can't believe nobody has mentioned the fact that it looks like Mickey is pissing over the disney logo in this image
Even more ridiculous is that according to this article the agreement even extends to the free trials, even if they don't extend past the trial period.
It's particularly entertaining because he's dead, so whatever agreement he made doesn't stop her from filing a suit. In other words, this is not a situation where someone who's currently alive had agreed to something in a click-through many years ago and is now suing.
One of the other interesting points of contract law that I think Disney will quickly lose is the fact that the agreement years ago was between two parties for something that happened years ago. They will have difficulty successfully arguing that what looked like a small scale deal that has long since ended actually had potential negative ramifications but only for one party, for the rest of their lives. If Disney were still giving him benefits up to his death, I think that could potentially be a different situation.
And as usual, depending on the level of negligence on Disney's end, it doesn't matter what he agreed to.
In other words, this is not a situation where someone who's currently alive had agreed to something in a click-through many years ago and is now suing.
The wife was the doctor who died. The husband is who is suing and also who signed up for the D+ trial so yes it is but on behalf of someone who cannot sue as she is dead.
People don't realize how important the outcome of this court case will be.
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.
Man, america is wild place. Do you have any laws there?
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.
Only the ones that are written for and protected by corporations. Everything else is the wild Wild West.
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."
It's the law that the businesses get to screw you.
Oh yeah and every infant is assigned an assault weapon at birth.
Oh yeah and every infant is assigned an assault weapon at birth.
Man, here voenkom has to find you and give you povestka to assign you assault rifle.
It's gonna be nuts.
It's certainly going to cause a reaction.
view more: next ›