The lawsuit claims that Dr. Kanokporn Tangsuan suffered a fatal allergic reaction after eating at a Disney Springs restaurant despite repeatedly informing the waiter of her severe allergy.

  • gibmiser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    4 months ago

    "Disney is calling for the lawsuit to be dismissed because her husband signed up for a one-month trial of the Disney+ streaming service years prior.

    The company says signing up for the trial requires users to arbitrate all disputes with the company."

    Some lawyers truly are scum.

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        So would this mean that Disney can no longer use their massive legal department to crush fair use of their IP? If someone signs up for Disney+, the arbitration agreement goes both ways.

        I would think a competent judge would just ask the Disney lawyer that question. Like, “do you want to be out of a job?”

        • Billiam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          27
          ·
          4 months ago

          No.

          You and Disney agree to arbitrate all your claims. Disney still retains the right to fuck you over to the full extent of the legal system.

          After all, corporations are people, and some people are more people than other people.

    • edric@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      Arguing over health/death via a technicality is one of the lowest of lows.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        This shouldn’t even be a technicality here. If this goes through and a TOS is universally binding to your life then the court system just died. Also they can put other ridiculous things in there like you owe them the subscription money in perpetuity even if you decide to uninstall the app. They’ll argue the consideration is there because you can re-install at any time.

        • Glemek@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          Just get your bullets inscribed with “by receiving this bullet you have agreed to our tos, by which all liability is to be decided by the shooter’s dog, who does not like you.” Then murder is legal.

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      I do hope whoever suggested that this is a legitimate cause to dismiss the case dies of an intestinal blockage caused by hemorrhoids. Just a thing I hope.

      • QuantumSparkles@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        4 months ago

        Very much nottheonion material. Something like

        ”Disney Legal Team Argues that Agreeing to the Terms & Conditions of Their Streaming Platform Releases The Company of Any and All Potential Liability in Shellfish Poisonings”

    • nifty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Don’t blame lawyers, blame the lawmakers. Heck, people and/or civil society is responsible for petitioning to lawmakers for stronger protections. Absurd amounts of money/lobbying has perverted the process, which is why a lot of these entities need to be taxed of out their power to have lobbying money.