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.
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.
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.”
How the fuck is it not punishable to write stuff into those contracts that contradict the law (obv. i mean this past a certain company size). Like for real.
I’m not exactly sure that it DOES contradict the law, which is the problem.
My hope for this case is that it sets the precident of crushing their bullshit terms of forced arbitration before this happens again and deems terms like these unenforcable. To date, I’m not aware of anyone challenging this in court - meanwhile every company in the country is adding terms like these to their software agreements. So let’s throw this shit out for good.
I was being general, didn’t write that i suppose. I am also refereing to companies trying to void warranties for no legal reason etc. There’s plenty of contradictory agreements out there.
Disney winning sets a precedent that will ultimately lead to vigilante justice by necessity.
If Disney wins, then our “justice” system does not work and cannot be trusted, thus leading people to doing what they need to just to survive when every company starts using that clause to prevent us from holding them responsible for anything at all.
And if that’s the case, I guess I need to dig out my mask and cape, and get back to work as a crime fighter.
Yeah, it certainly has the potential to go sour too. And if they were shopping around for favorable courts, that could be more likely than I would hope. Because to your point, our justice system does not actually work particularly well as it turns out. If the highest court in the land is so corrupt, all these little courts with even less visibility and oversight scare me.
The issue is the agreement is written in their favor. You give up your rights, but they don’t. I’d have to read it to be sure, but I’d be fairly confident in saying that it’s going to be written to favor them.
Have an ultra-brutal “antihero” character like Punisher, who does extremely violent shit to many “only slightly evil” parties. Each time, as part of their calling card, they leave behind a message to the effect of “We do not have a fair court system, and so I am creating one.” Biggest victims include judges, but not many lawyers - and they aim for an end result where large organizations don’t try to lobby their way out of problems, but instead argue them on true merits in court.
I don’t know what the exact agreement here is, but such things are very often not enforceable. You can’t have someone sign their rights away. You can have them sign the document, but that document will be worthless in court and will not be respected. Those are more to scare people and discourage them from suing the company.
Dependig on the country you live in, there might be some law above what Disney might say. For example in most European Countries it’s the case. And no matter what Disney writes, like “killing you is alright”. There is a law above it that overrules it.
Right to Sue is a right. Arbitration clause is a contractual obligations.
They should be able to sue regardless of being contractually obliged to seek arbitration. Disney can sue them for violating the terms of the contract later, but nothing should hinder anyone’s right to seek justice.
Meanwhile, even though D+ wants to apply their TOS to the theme parks, if you buy a D+ gift card, those funds cannot be used at any of the theme parks lol.
I really hope a politician bans those “Class Action Waiver” and “Revoking Right to Arbitration” riders that are getting put into everyone’s Term and Conditions contracts. We should have the right to band together if a corporation fucks us over and this is ridiculous.
The way to handle the class action waiver is for all the would-be class action lawsuit plaintiffs to file individual lawsuits. Companies will realize pretty quickly why they do, in fact, want to only have one lawsuit to contend with instead of several thousand or million.
I’m aware how inaccessible civil court is for many people. While not addressing the time aspect, plenty of lawyers will work on contingency. Hurting a companies bottom line is what they understand the most.
Theoretically, everyone’s supposed to have right to self-representation. If some enterprising individual helps them to forego their need for a lawyer, and gives lengthy instructions on all the right forms, even if only 40% of the participants do it correctly, it could be a big hassle for them.
Of course, the other issue is that it would be a big hassle for the courts.
Man, I cant wait till the grand confluence of fascist sycophants foot-trolls and fascist sycophant appointees hit eachother and it all becomes apparent they are just …. oh wait that already is happening with gaz—-oh wait… oh wait. what? you mean Compan000s0sdf0sodjufhgah00y7ruouoobbel peu8rp;il