• @halcyoncmdr
    link
    English
    1129 days ago

    None of that should even matter.

    Disney is claiming the one line in the terms and conditions of a free trial of Disney+ years ago means the consumer must abide by those terms in perpetuity for anything Disney related. Even things completely unrelated to Disney+.

    • John Richard
      link
      429 days ago

      Yes a lot of conservative higher courts and Supreme Court have determined that arbitration agreements don’t expire and last for eternity. Read various court cases on them. It is truly sick that the higher courts have ruled this way. It shouldn’t matter but in many cases it does matter.

      • @halcyoncmdr
        link
        English
        729 days ago

        My point is the agreement was for an entirely unrelated product. A restaurant is in no way associated with the Disney+ streaming service. No one would expect the terms and conditions from a streaming service to apply to a sit down restaurant.

        I’d even say that while they’re both under the Disney brand, they almost certainly are separate companies, further differentiating their products.

        • John Richard
          link
          028 days ago

          I know and agree. What I’m saying is that the courts and especially conservative justices don’t care. Should Disney be sanctioned for this bad faith attempt? Absolutely! But will Disney be? Probably not. Is it possible Disney’s motion to compel or dismiss will be granted. It is definitely possible.