this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
73 points (98.7% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

13008 readers
552 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] KingBoo@lemmy.world 21 points 11 months ago (3 children)

People don't realize how important the outcome of this court case will be.

[–] uis@lemm.ee 15 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Man, america is wild place. Do you have any laws there?

[–] Crikeste@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago

Most Americans would be offended by your comment, and that’s why we don’t have nice things. We’re very, and I can not stress this enough, VERY stupid.

[–] oakey66@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

Only the ones that are written for and protected by corporations. Everything else is the wild Wild West.

[–] Lets_Eat_Grandma@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's the law that the businesses get to screw you.

Oh yeah and every infant is assigned an assault weapon at birth.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

It will likely be dismissed as Disney wasn't the company responsible for staffing or managing the restaurant.

Which sucks, because I desperately want to see Disney take another massive L in the spotlight of the mainstream news cycle.

[–] Qwaffle_waffle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] Sonotsugipaa@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 11 months ago

It's certainly going to cause a reaction.

[–] eskimofry@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Arbitration clauses must be made illegal

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 9 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Or at least reasonable.

It's perfectly reasonable for, say, a tattoo artist not to be liable for the medical bills, if the ink causes a hitherto unknown allergy to kick in.

It's not reasonable to argue that a streaming service agreement covers liability for being cut in half by a train.

There has to be a reasonable understanding of the underlying risks that are covered. Some things are just inherently risky, and if the buyer knows and understands that, she can agree on taking that risk. Otherwise, no doctor would ever touch any patient ever again.

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Otherwise, no doctor would ever touch any patient ever again.

Demonstrably false. In a public healthcare system it is also possible to have publicly funded patient injury compensation systems. Source: Live in Norway and we have both.

[–] leisesprecher@feddit.org 2 points 11 months ago (3 children)

That's not the same. You still don't have any legal claims against the hospital or the doctor. You can't sue your surgeon, because you missed, say another week of work because of some unexpected bleeding.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Overwrite1@lemm.ee 14 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

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.

[–] ngwoo@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago (6 children)

Make sure to pirate all Disney media instead of consuming it legally so that you can sue them if they try to kill you.

[–] SuckMyWang@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

That’s what I don’t get about this. The point is either to get out of paying or at least make it very difficult. At the same time the cost to Disney as a company with all the bad press and fall out from doing this would be orders of magnitude greater than simply paying the widower compensation. Who signed off on it? The idea that a lawyer can do what ever it takes to win a case while simultaneously destroying the company they work for seems dumb as shit from a purely financial point of view.

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

Jesus... You're not wrong. That's fucking crazy. You're NOT wrong. Wtf is wrong with my country?

[–] Irf23@eviltoast.org 1 points 11 months ago

Would that break the ToS if I had a trial previously?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] zarlin@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)
[–] Aquila@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Disney allowed to kill your spouse because you watched the mandalorian

[–] TheDeepState@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Not the worse trade off. As long as we aren’t including Season 3.

[–] N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 11 months ago

The dark arts of the mouse are a pathway to legal techniques some consider to be… unnatural.

[–] Sway_Chameleon@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Even more ridiculous is that according to this article the agreement even extends to the free trials, even if they don't extend past the trial period.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8jl0ekjr0go

[–] jinarched@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Piracy is the safe option then. Got it.

[–] CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Piracy, watching through a friend, BluRays & DVDs, hard copies & actually owning something as opposed to...perpetually renting access, owning nothing & being happy about it.

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 2 points 11 months ago

All it takes is one free trial. They got me, it's over.

[–] Verdorrterpunkt@feddit.org 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

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.

Edit: Typo

[–] herrvogel@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

not enforceable

I mean sure, but writing agreements that contradict the law, at least in some of the more egregious cases, should really be actively punishable.

Those are more to scare people and discourage them from suing the company.

And this is why.

[–] Verdorrterpunkt@feddit.org 1 points 11 months ago

Yea, i am not so amused by the scaring people part. That is my problem here.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Disney said late Wednesday that it is “deeply saddened” by the family’s loss but stressed the Irish pub is neither owned nor operated by the company. The company’s stance in the litigation doesn’t affect the plaintiff’s claims against the eatery, it added.

“We are merely defending ourselves against the plaintiff’s attorney’s attempt to include us in their lawsuit against the restaurant,” the company wrote in an emailed statement.

For some reason that word "merely" just gets right under my skin. Like they KNOW it's peak slimy, but they are just trying to do their job, man.

...Which is to protect the company at the expense of anything else: Reason, decency, consumer rights...

[–] Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Honestly, isn't them invoking the arbitration clause a direct admission of guilt? Had they just came to court and said "we have nothing to do with it" they might've just gotten away with it. Like this, they literally drag themselves into the suit and say you can't sue me. Not a good look.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] archomrade@midwest.social 3 points 11 months ago

I can't believe nobody has mentioned the fact that it looks like Mickey is pissing over the disney logo in this image

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

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.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/experience/theme-parks/2023/12/20/disney-plus-gift-card-accident/71995807007/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR3X1rH7JlfCdnTUyz73bhi5SLAEpTyc0vpA-zpL64nbOD9Ri9t7952jcDo_aem_K3wbukZX1gCnJQzBb3Biuw

I can't believe this is even a fucking thing

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] letme_meowmeow@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago

yeah, that work like a trap.

Sign up for one service with arbitrate ... that would apply for all service.

[–] LazaroFilm@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

How can a streaming service agreement apply to a restaurant ~~in a park~~?

[–] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago

This is why those ToS are 71pages long. I don't think there are many good judges out there anymore, but I hope the one that reviews this case goes absolutely ape-shit on Disney. There is a legal tradition of harsh punishments for criminals in examplar cases to set detterents to future crimes. The same needs to be done to reel in these corporations.

[–] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Wasn't even in a park. The restaurant is in a separate mall. No ticket needed.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

A mall owned and operated by Disney, with Disney branding everywhere, and store names heavily influenced by Disney properties, like "BB Wolf's Sausage Co.", and where "Guest Services" is managed by Disney, and the property rules are Disneyworld's property rules.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cordlesslamp@lemmy.today 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (7 children)

It would cost Disney literally pocket change to compensate the widower, but instead they rather spend hundred of thousands of dollars for lawyers and legal fee to fight it.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] LANIK2000@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I sincerely hope this shit blows up. May corporations providing "free" services forever be associated with literal devil's contacts. Piracy is no longer just about sticking it to the man, it's about freedom!

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 11 months ago

Now THAT is bad PR. Wow. Going to be hard to top it.

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] lulztard@feddit.org 1 points 11 months ago

Just 'murica.

load more comments
view more: next ›