Technology

59587 readers

5236 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Disney Seeking Dismissal of Raglan Road Death Lawsuit Because Victim Was Disney+ Subscriber (wdwnt.com)

submitted 3 months ago by otter@lemmy.ca to c/technology@lemmy.world

56 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/16155215

Disney has asked a Florida court to dismiss a wrongful death lawsuit filed earlier this year regarding a woman who passed away due to anaphylaxis after a meal at Disney Springs, citing an arbitration waiver in the terms and conditions for Disney+.

...

In the latest update for the Disney Springs wrongful death lawsuit, Disney cited legal language within the terms and conditions for Disney+, which “requires users to arbitrate all disputes with the company.” Disney claims Piccolo reportedly agreed to this in 2019 when signing up for a one-month free trial of the streaming service on his PlayStation console.

In the May 31 motion filed to move the wrongful death lawsuit to arbitration, Disney attorneys said that the Disney+ subscriber agreement states that any dispute, except for small claims, “must be resolved by individual binding arbitration.”

...

Attorneys for Piccolo called Disney’s latest motion “preposterous,” and that it’s “‘absurd’ to believe that the 153 million subscribers to the popular streaming service have waived all claims against the company and its affiliates because of language ‘buried’ within the terms and conditions,” according to Newsday.

The notion that terns agreed to by a consumer when creating a Disney+ free trial account would forever bar that consumer’s right to a jury trial in any dispute with any Disney affiliate or subsidiary, is so outrageously unreasonable and unfair as to shock the judicial conscience, and this court should not enforce such an agreement.

Brian Denny, Piccolo’s West Palm Beach attorney in a filing on August 2, 2024

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ngwoo@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

This should be what finally starts the push to ban mandatory arbitration clauses.

[–] gnutrino@programming.dev 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This should be what finally starts the push to guillotine the upper management of Disney but I guess we've got to take whatever we can get.

[–] ngwoo@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I gotta say it's refreshing to have a place to post where this kind of comment isn't immediately deleted and the user IP banned like Reddit

[–] frezik@midwest.social 0 points 3 months ago

Bring with it a big expansion in the number of federal judges. They already have an overloaded case schedule. The Supremes have made this worse in their ruling against Chevron Deference, as every regulation a corp doesn't like can now be challenged. One of the reasons judges have let these clauses go through is because it relieves the case burden on them.

Something like quadrupling the size was justified even before Chevron went down or we talk about things that would bring even more cases.