Disney + – what absolute scutters

Have we done the Disney wrongful death lawsuit thing? It seems insane – a woman dies from an allergic reaction at Disney World last year despite repeated warnings that she had allergies, now Disney is calling for the wrongful death lawsuit to be thrown out as her husband signed up to a trial of Disney + in 2019  and the terms he signed up to said any disagreement must be settled out of court.

What does it say of Disney and their lawyers that this is their plan?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8jl0ekjr0go

Scumbaggery, obviously, but he bought the tickets using his Disney plus account, so is bound by the contractual terms he agreed to when he opened it.

No-one reads the small print…

I mean, does anyone realise that you agreed to allow STW to forcibly harvest your blood, semen and organs should you travel within 10 miles of Todmorden? Didn’t think so.

Goes with employees in Disney Paris being told not to refer to the place as Mauschwitz so referred to it as Duchau instead, terrible company.

In the uk that wouldn’t stand up in court as you can’t sign  away your right not to sue over death or injury. No idea in America but i suspect it’s just a tactic to try and get the other side to run out of money, rather than a belief that they are right

Would be very surprised if a decent lawyer couldn’t tear that “agreement” apart in a few mins anyhow, but don’t – in the US at least – these things always get settled out of court anyway? I.e. wronged party gets payout, wrongun (Disney) doesn’t have to accept liability.

They’re taking the Mickey.

I mean, does anyone realise that you agreed to allow STW to forcibly harvest your blood, semen and organs should you travel within 10 miles of Todmorden? Didn’t think so.

That explains the 502 Club “pop in for a coffee” offer. I knew it was too good to be true!

Surely a restaurant and a streaming service are entirely different things even if it’s the same name?

They’re taking the Mickey

*claps*

I mean, does anyone realise that you agreed to allow STW to forcibly harvest your blood, semen and organs should you travel within 10 miles of Todmorden?

And I though a free crud catcher and some Mint Sauce stickers was a good offer!

They’re taking the Mickey.

I don’t think Goofy comments like that are very appropriate.

It seemed they re made the agreement not to sue in front of a judge when they bought the tickets as well. I suspect this is the larger part of the actual legal argument, why they included the Disney plus sign-up is odd.

What’s also odd is they’re only suing for 50k. I wonder if avoiding a jury is also about avoiding punative damages

It seems like a way to mitigate against the US’s lawsuit happy culture (you know, the one we mock, and rail against, especially when it seems it’s headed this way), and sends the complaint to arbitration.

If it was many another company we’d be praising the rational approach.

I would guess that there is some missing info. here, like Disney have already asked if they want to go to arbitration and they have said no for some reason, probably as mentioned above to avoid punitive damages.

What can you expect in a country run by plutocrats?

What can you expect in a country run by plutocrats?

Appluads.

I’d just like to thank the OP for using the word ‘scutter’ . Very under used imo. I use it now and again, but never hear anyone else say it.

I assumed it was because I’m from Leicester and live in Leeds.

Pirates, the lot of them… Yoh ho ho, the pirates life for me… my favourite ride.

What can you expect in a country run by plutocrats?

You cant blame them for wanting to Minnie-mise the damage…………

ill get my coat!

It seemed they re made the agreement not to sue in front of a judge when they bought the tickets as well.

Eh? Something about that looks a bit hinky – why on earth would you do that?

Obviously a bit rubbish, but it’s the age-old problem of to what extent you’re allowed to cram stuff into t&cs that no-one reads. Whether this kind of underhand behaviour holds up in court, or the poor chap concerned has the energy or money to even get it there, is another matter.

I’m not sure you can contract away your constitutional rights to access the court system as and when you choose, whatever box you’ve ticked online.

Hopefully this will be struck down, and any damages will reflect Disney’s behaviour both in regard to his wife’s death and their approach to compensating him.

Seems odd that Disney, a company, would be legally allowed to allow mug punters to sign away a normal legal right. It’s not like Disney are the police, or the judiciary, or even any legal authority of any kind, given that they are instead, an entertainment company*.

But this is America, land of the free where rich c**** can do just about anything they want, except maybe actual daytime murder, unless THEY’RE COMING RIGHT FOR US! there is some sort of property invasion that justifies it.

* nominally.

What’s also odd is they’re only suing for 50k. I wonder if avoiding a jury is also about avoiding punative damages

From the BBC article it says “He is suing Disney for a sum in excess of $50,000 plus legal costs.”, so don’t know exactly what he’s suing for and whether that $50k is some sort of threshold. Be interesting (read: worrying) to see if this actually holds up; wonder if they’ve just chucked absolutely everything into the T&Cs and then just test whether something sticks should these situations arise. Poor chap.

Disney is curious in that it has acquired a lot of these rights by stealth, particularly around its parks. It’s big enough to behave like a mini-state, like a few corporations in the US.

In the UK, you can’t sign away statutory rights in this fashion, it would be an unfair contract term, but I have a feeling that these protections may not be as easy to enforce against a mega-corp like Disney.

It seemed they re made the agreement not to sue in front of a judge when they bought the tickets as well

They made a new agreement to Disney T&Cs when they bought resort tickets (in addition to the 2019 Disney+ T&Cs), I doubt that the tickets were bought in front of a judge

Disney want to keep this out of the public eye by going to private arbitration and they’re stretching the T&Cs for all they’re worth

Hopefully this will be struck down

+1

Disney want to keep this out of the public eye by going to private arbitration

The attempt to deny a grieving husband his constitutional right to seek redress via the courts is likely to be more newsworthy than any initial negligence, so a bit of a Streisand effect in play here.

They need to work out the point at which smart-arse lawyering is doing them far more damage.

+1

“Given that this restaurant is neither owned nor operated by Disney, we are merely defending ourselves against the plaintiff’s attorney’s attempt to include us in their lawsuit against the restaurant.”

Based on the above, it looks like they’re trying to include Disney in the lawsuit – unsure why.

It’s because the contracts that Disney is relying upon talk about “affiliates”. Disney promotes the Raglan Road Irish Pub and Restaurant and rents them the premises.

The lawsuit is also going after the restaurant business

Ah, affiliates.

Those things that a bigger company influences and extracts cash from but can distance themselves from when there’s a shit-fan interface.

I like a story with a mildly-less-shit-than-normal twist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr7r9djxj0do

Though what this mostly means is it remains untested in court so someone else is going to come back and do the same thing but with something that gathers less publicity, and so the precedents will get established quietly and if it’s The Bad Timeline version the next time it comes to a high profile one will be all “yeah but this isn’t shocking, it’s happened before for other stuff”.