Disney Seeking Dismissal of Raglan Road Death Lawsuit Because Victim Was Disney+ Subscriber

Submitted ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨otter@lemmy.ca⁩ to ⁨technology@lemmy.world⁩

https://wdwnt.com/2024/08/disney-dismissal-wrongful-death-lawsuit/

cross-posted from: 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

source

Comments

Sort:hotnew top

sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Wow, just… wow. Can you be any more evil?

We really need to strike down this arbitration agreement nonsense. If I want to resolve a dispute by arbitration, that should be an option, but never a requirement.

source
- exocortex@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  It’s also a great example why these mega corps should be broken up into smaller pieces.
  
  If forced arbitration persists (and this argumentation from Disney is successful and then used as precedence) any service used from one company can be used to forever ban you from taking legal action against that company again even if the service and the reason for the legal action have nothing to do with each other.
  
  Am I right in understanding that this case is about someone dying from eating in a Disney owned restaurant that by accident was a Disney+ subscriber?
  
  If one company owns everything like Amazon, Google, Apple and in the future maybe even water supply, garbage collection, operates my car and is my insurer or bank account (and owner of one of the 4 remaining fast food chains in the country) how can people actually sue a company then ?
  
  source
  - IzzyScissor@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Her HUSBAND signed the terms + conditions for a free 1 month trial. They’re claiming that he can’t sue for a wrongful death on her behalf because of THAT.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - some_designer_dude@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Their leadership should be broken up into smaller pieces.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Arbitration isn’t inherently bad, but any arbitration clause in any unilateral contract should automatically be void.
  
  source
- barsquid@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  And certainly not binding arbitration.
  
  source
Vespair@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Forced Arbitration should absolutely be illegal. Here’s an article on the topic if you’ve never thought about it before:

thehill.com/…/3986551-the-time-to-ban-forced-arbi…

source
ngwoo@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
This should be what finally starts the push to ban mandatory arbitration clauses.

source
- gnutrino@programming.dev ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  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.
  
  source
- frezik@midwest.social ⁨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.
  
  source
_sideffect@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Pirate everything, then you don’t have to sign any TOS

taps head

source
- Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Best ad for piracy in a while. It not only lets you consume media how ever you’d like it also preserves your ability to be compensated for damages.
  
  source
mindlight@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Not an American… But holy crap… If Disney succeeds with this… then … E-v-e-r-y single service will have a clause like “you hereby agree to never ever take legal action against us, our subsidiaries, cookie partners, affiliates, our friend’s dog or Bob for anything we might or might not have caused in the next 2 billion years if we don’t give you permission.”.

I’m happy that I’m living in the European Union av and not in Florida.

source
- thedirtyknapkin@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  they already kind of do over here. this case is going to set precedent for how broadly enforceable that are.
  
  source
- slumberlust@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Car TOCs here already include consent for any passenger…insane.
  
  source
  - todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    I believe that’s treated as a matter of common sense, that getting into a car comes with an understanding of the inherent risks. Cars also have a couple “risk of injury or death” stickers in them, under the visors or on the door.
    
    Similar laws exist for horses, to protect horse owners from litigation when someone falls off a horse. I think you only need a single sign for indemnification.
    
    To clarify, this isn’t comparable to the fucked up thing Disney is doing.
    
    source
- Chip_Rat@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  That’s already very common and should be shut down, but usually it applies to the particular service you are using… Not whatever this bullshit is…
  
  source
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
People always act surprised when I say I hate Disney. This type of shit is exactly why.

If this exact thing was a villain plot in a Disney film, it would be laughed as being unrealistically evil.

source
- sbv@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  There are so many great reasons to hate on Disney. This one is so incredibly over the top.
  
  source
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

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

Agree 100%

But why weren’t all Americans up on the fences against such conditions during recent years?

source
- dohpaz42@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  As an American there are several factors that weigh in situations like this:
  
  Legal language is a foreign and difficult language to grasp and understand. That’s why lawyers go to school for as long as they do. Yet, citizens are expected to understand it as if it were plain English. So a lot of us don’t read or understand what we’re agreeing to; especially when it’s 10-s of pages long.
  
  Out of sight and out of mind. Unless it happens to us personally, there really is no incentive for us to do anything about it. It’s as, I know, but we’ve been cultivated as a culture with its head in the sand. Hell, even our constitutional right to peaceful protest has been all but stripped away from us.
  
  Financial barriers. It is expensive to fight legal battles, most especially against huge corporations like Disney. A lot of lawyers demand a lot of money up front, and getting our day in court to take years. Corporations can afford to stall. Is plebs can barely afford the initial consult. So unless it’s something considered “in the bag”, it’s probably not financially feasible.
  
  source
- technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  
  But why weren’t all Americans up on the fences against such conditions during recent years?
  
  You’re talking about a state that openly supports genocide. I don’t think people are paying much attention to anything.
  
  source
  - NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    I don’t think people are paying much attention to anything.
    
    But right now they are telling each other that this would be a vote…
    
    source
Deebster@programming.dev ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

“Disney understandably may want to benefit from the privacy and confidentiality that arbitration brings, rather than having a wrongful death suit heard in public with the associated publicity,” says Jamie Cartwright, partner at law firm Charles Russell Speechlys.

– from the BBC article

If that’s what they want, they clearly never heard of the Streisand Effect. This is disgraceful behaviour from Disney, and I hope they come to severely regret it.

source
- some_designer_dude@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Narrator: they won’t.
  
  source
umami_wasbi@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
My jaw dropped after the first paragraph. What the fuck is this?

source
TarantulaFudge@startrek.website ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
There’s no way a judge is gonna allow this. Outrageous. The language is way out of scope.

source
- deranger@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8jl0ekjr0go
  
  Disney adds that Mr Piccolo accepted these terms again when using his Disney account to buy tickets for the theme park in 2023.
  
  Between that and the Florida judge I’m a bit worried. Fuck forced arbitration.
  
  source
  - troyunrau@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Ironically, the saving grace here might be Florida and Disney hating each other so much. Maybe… Silver linings and such.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Back in high school I performed in the chorus at a Christmas concert at Disney World. Prior to doing it, I had to sign away my right to my image and voice “in perpetuity and throughout the universe.”

Now I’m wondering if that all still applies and taking selfies means I could get sued by Disney.

source
Rentlar@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
By continuing to display Disney advertisements on my computer and within my field of vision after September 1st, 2024, Disney hereby waives all right to force binding arbitration just because someone signed up for a free trial.

source
aeronmelon@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
Disney: “You stepped on a crack, were legally allowed to break your mamma’s back.”

source
Teal@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
This is atrocious. Coincidentally Disney is planing to open a park themed with villains. Seems like they can save time and money by renaming the whole place Villain’s World.

I’ve been a few times in my younger years but have zero desire as an adult. Sure they have some nice rides and attractions but the Disney culture is a huge turnoff to me, as are the very high prices of everything there. If I were to take a vacation that costs similar I’m off to a national park or maybe international travel. I prefer real culture over fantasy land.

source