• @snekerpimp
    link
    1261 month ago

    It’s not even if you watch something. Even if you get Disney+ in a combo package and you don’t even watch one thing, arbitration. Crooked corpo

  • Diplomjodler
    link
    1001 month ago

    Dear valued customer,

    in order to ensure a continuing enjoyable experience for all our customers, a death squad had been dispatched to your house. Please direct all complaints to the arbitration department.

    Kind regards, Disney Corporation

  • Hanrahan
    link
    fedilink
    English
    47
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I dont know, I’ve watched all of Mando and I don’t have Disney+ or a wife, and will never have either. i prefer living in the double sin or torrenting and having a parter I’m not married to

    Maybe Pedro will come kick my ass but I’m okay with that.

    • CubitOom
      link
      fedilink
      English
      17
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      My wife and I don’t have Disney+ either. We watched the first season of mando and were like…ehhh, let’s rewatch Star Trek.

    • @aeronmelon
      link
      61 month ago

      He’s going to come watch Mandalorian with you.

  • @ChicoSuave
    link
    461 month ago

    So this works for any corporation? If you are a member/subscriber/user the corp can fuck up your shit and then use an unrelated legal clause from a different contract to prevent legal ramifications?

    Did Disney see Cyberpunk and think that corporate dystopia is the right fit for their business? Is Disney suggesting that it’s okay for Netflix to shoot password sharers but not the people using the service without subscription? Does using an iPhone give up my life to Apple? This shit was literally a joke 10 years ago and now Disney is trying to pull this shit in real life. Unbelievable.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      171 month ago

      This is a great case for the DOJ to look at Disney the way they did Google just now, and evaluate whether Disney should be broken up. I have no confidence that that will actually happen.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      61 month ago

      Did Disney see Cyberpunk and think that corporate dystopia is the right fit for their business?

      While they didn’t actively decide, it is their end goal. It’s just the natural outcome of capitalism, where an infinite increase of profits and getting a monopoly is the desired state for every corporation. It’s the intended function of our system.

      In order to protect us and our planet we need to abolish capitalism in all its forms.

    • Caveman
      link
      11 month ago

      Not really. The TOS is a collection of legal garbage that they’re going to use to argue in court. You can’t sign away your basic rights by agreeing to the TOS since the clause in the TOS would be illegal.

      Doesn’t stop Disney from trying of course

  • @ngwoo
    link
    English
    461 month ago

    Just pirate it that way you agreed to nothing.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]
      link
      fedilink
      111 month ago

      Commercial TOS contracts that forfeit your rights risk that forfeiture extending beyond the constraints ofmthe contract.

      Which is a great reason to avoid terms of service at all,

      Which is a great reason to pirate.

      It reminds me of Google’s war against adblocking, which fails to acknowledge ads are a vector for spyware and malware.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      8
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Who doesn’t take a free trial? They got me, it’s over. No amount of pirating can save me now.
      Sure, this would never hold up in court in my country, but I also could not afford to go to court against fucking Disney.

  • @kylie_kraft
    link
    32
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    hey freelancers, just for a laugh sneak a binding arbitration clause into your next contract and kill your boss’s wife

    • key
      link
      fedilink
      English
      161 month ago

      Yeonmi Park? I suppose it’d explain a lot if she were.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    181 month ago

    Strictly speaking, I think Disney is arguing that the case must go through private arbitration first, not that the matter should be dropped entirely. They’re still scumbags. I’m never signing up to Disney plus (or anything else Disney if I can help it) now.

    • @chuckleslord
      link
      181 month ago

      Arbitration isn’t “first”, it’s only. Here’s the wording from the terms:

      any dispute between you and us, except for small claims, is subject to a class action waiver and must be resolved by individual binding arbitration

      Must be resolved there means there is no other avenue for legal recourse.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    91 month ago

    From the article:

    "Given that this restaurant is neither owned nor operated by Disney, we are merely defending ourselves against the plaintiff’s attorney’s attempt to include us in their lawsuit against the restaurant.”

    I don’t have anything to defend or oppose that argument, but if it’s true, why would disney have to be a part of the lawsuit at all? Isn’t it then just a terrible preemptive move to refer to terms of the Disney+ membership?

  • @pyre
    link
    51 month ago

    that’s a quality meme. sad and infuriating news though.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    41 month ago

    I’m going to write some new TOS this weekend for myself and the universe.

    OK nevermind that is how people start writing a manifesto and i’ve got too much laundry and pickleball to start that bullshit.