re: OP UPDATED - Disney wants wrongful death lawsuit thrown out bc the plaintiff had Disney+

quote:

---

This thread isn’t about anything streaming on Disney+

---

So just to be clear: you don't believe threads about streaming services and the terms you agreed to when getting a free trial to said streaming services belongs on the MTV Board? Just want to be sure we're saying the same things here.

Yeah I was pro PT board and even I agree this topic belongs here because they are using their streaming service as the lynchpin of this argument. Likely 90% of this board has had at one point a Disney + membership or trial.

Added this to the OP but Disney has now waived its arbitration claim. LINK

quote:

---

Walt Disney Co on Monday agreed to have a court decide a wrongful death lawsuit brought by a widower in Florida, after earlier arguing the case belonged in arbitration because the man signed up for a trial of streaming service Disney+ in 2019.

---

quote:

---

"We believe this situation warrants a sensitive approach to expedite a resolution for the family who have experienced such a painful loss," Josh D'Amaro, chairman, Disney Experiences told Reuters in an emailed statement.

"As such, we've decided to waive our right to arbitration and have the matter proceed in court," D'Amaro added.

---

Translation: The optics on this were AWFUL!

quote:

---

The decision to not seek arbitration is unusual and suggests that Disney's lawyers believed the Disney+ agreement would not apply to the case, said Joseph Sellers, a plaintiffs' lawyer who routinely brings large-scale class actions in court and arbitration.

Consumers must be put on notice that they are agreeing to arbitrate specific types of claims in order for an agreement to be enforceable, so it is unlikely that a streaming service agreement would apply to a restaurant meal, according to Sellers, who is not involved in Piccolo's case.

"It would be more embarrassing for the company to litigate that issue and then lose as opposed to just walking away from the arbitration agreement," he said.

---

ETA: They were clearly going to lose this arbitration attempt from the start. They must not have realized they were also going to have a massive PR nightmare on their hands.

quote:

---

It's also not "political" - I doubt ANY side on the political spectrum (no matter how much anyone from the other side in the debate would want to believe otherwise) had Disney's back on this one.

In a world with some of the most polarizing politics in 80 plus years, Disney's "you can't sue us for killing your spouse because you once used a free trial to watch The Rescuers Down Under" frickery response has reached epic levels of universal hate.

There are third world dictators that were like, "Damn man. That's fricked up."

---

yeah. I'm a pretty hardcore Libertarian these days and don't know a single republican, democrat, or libertarian that feels like Disney isn't a piece of shite on this one. pretty universally regarded as a dick move.


i will say that i commented on the OTL thread, I'm deathly allergic to shellfish. Due to my southern family and a couple of trips a year to the coast/beach, i find myself at seafood places. i don't order anything fried and always specify that my food needs to be cooked separate.

the lawsuit alleges that they made dairy/nut allergies known, but then ordered corn fritters and onion rings. i'm not a culinary genius, but milk and flour/nuts are going to be involved in the making of both items AND they will be fried with such things. when i get a steak/chicken/burger at those places, i always get a salad or veggies because it would be retarded to think they're going to do some fries in a separate vat of oil.