this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2024
1133 points (99.3% liked)

Lemmy Shitpost

26212 readers
3277 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.

Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means:

-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...

If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Memes

2.Lemmy Review

3.Mildly Infuriating

4.Lemmy Be Wholesome

5.No Stupid Questions

6.You Should Know

7.Comedy Heaven

8.Credible Defense

9.Ten Forward

10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)


Reach out to

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago

Not if you pirate it

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Putting myself in her husband's shoes, I can't tell how I'd feel about this meme. On one hand, it trivializes his tragedy a little bit, on the other hand, it's evidence that society is generally outraged about this.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm going with the outrage side here: the fact that they are even suggesting that this is legal footing is an affront to humanity

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 weeks ago

Difference between this and helium is helium follows rules of the universe, and this fucking contract law is human-enforced.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

I read that in Charlie's voice! Honestly, sounds legit. But....I'm single. No wife here! hahahaha..ha..ha...cries

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

I did some digging and it seems like the family's suit should actually be against the pub that was renting the in-park space from Disney. It's just unfortunate that the prevalence of corporate propaganda in news media, especially in what would be a critical period for Disney to invest in damage control for their public image, makes it difficult to confidently believe one thing or the other in light of that finding.

I never cared much for Disney to begin with, so I won't waste any more time with verification. Regardless, the suit definitely shouldn't be dismissed on their argument of the arbitration agreement alone because it would set an awful precedent, even if the suit itself happens to be toothless. I wouldn't put it past Disney to try to take advantage of the situation to that end (They may be hoping the suit will be dismissed for arbitration because the judge already knows the suit is pointless so that future legitimate lawsuits against them for wrongful deaths in their park can be more easily dismissed on the same grounds).

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I did some digging and it seems like the family’s suit should actually be against the pub that was renting the in-park space from Disney. It’s just unfortunate that the prevalence of corporate propaganda in news media

He is suing both Disney and the pub. The pub obviously because they were negligent and Disney because it is in Disney World. It is up to the court to decide how much liability Disney should have vs. the pub, if any.

I doubt Disney would be able to successfully argue that just because the restaurant is leasing space in Disney World that they have zero liability but that's up to the court.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

He is suing both Disney and the pub. The pub obviously because they were negligent and Disney because it is in Disney World. It is up to the court to decide how much liability Disney should have vs. the pub, if any.

It could very well be in the contract with the pub that Disney requires allergenic options to be available and the space doesn't have sufficient space to keep those ingredients separate. In such an instance Disney absolutely bare a significant amount of responsibility.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I just don't get why Disney would go to that extent when the lawsuit should have easily been disregarded as not applicable to them. Digging up an old Disney+ membership to find some terms which could apply seems like a terrible PR move for their service.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

It's an interesting legal test case (which I hope Disney would lose) but this is certainly the wrong time to try it out.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Hell yeah smiling friends meme format!!!

[–] [email protected] 60 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So if you were to burn down a Disney resort, they'd have to arbitrate?

[–] [email protected] 22 points 4 weeks ago

No, the terms forfeit your right to a judge/jury not theirs

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago
[–] [email protected] 89 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

Hold on i just realised

Some arbitration clauses work both ways, meaning disney can't sue you just as much as you can't sue them

So in theory if you signed up for a free trial or something, pirating (and distributing) any disney content would be absolutely legal

Edit:

Ok i looked up their terms of use (which was slightly harder because of the pile of articles about the latest lawsuit), and they have their bums covered:

  1. BINDING ARBITRATION AND CLASS

(...)

You and Disney agree to resolve, by binding individual arbitration as provided below, all Disputes (...) except for: (...) (ii) any dispute relating to the ownership or enforcement of intellectual property rights. (...)

Source: https://disneytermsofuse.com/english/#BINDING-ARBITRATION-AND-CLASS-ACTION-WAIVER, accesed 2024-08-17

Edit 2: added formatting to the quote

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 month ago

That they have a specific exception for IP tells me all what they really think about their customers.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago

That's why they pay the lawyers

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

that's not how it works. the law does not exist to protect you; it exists to make you tolerate your exploitation and feel like it's fair.

edit: fixed one letter.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I wouldn't even say that. The law exists to protect the powerful and doesn't care if it feels fair to you or not.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 weeks ago

right but it can't protect the powerful without gaslighting you, because the direct use of violence for control is really really fucking inefficient, and the use of pure terror for control isn't much better. you need to build the prison in your prisoners' heads, y'know?

[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Probably not, they say that you agree to settle your disputes with x corporation through arbitration, nothing about x corporation's disputes with you. Don't test the most expensive lawyers in the world, especially when they get to pick the arbitor.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

I am not saying that's a good idea, but i know that for example discord's arbitration clauze explicitly states that it works both ways, so it's not impossible that disney's does too

load more comments
view more: next ›