Terms of Rule
Terms of Rule
28 comments
-
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
-
Consumer protections are a joke
-
Absolutely not in my country
-
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
-
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.
-
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.
-
He’s going to come watch Mandalorian with you.
-
"Daddy is a state of mind"
-
-
Just pirate it that way you agreed to nothing.
-
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.
-
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.
-
-
I'd say this is a clear case of EULA roofing.
-
hey freelancers, just for a laugh sneak a binding arbitration clause into your next contract and kill your boss's wife
-
Is that a robot in the image?
-
Yeonmi Park? I suppose it'd explain a lot if she were.
-
Park runs the YouTube channel "Voice of North Korea by Yeonmi Park",[16] which as of July 2023 has over one million subscribers.[3] Her political views have been called "American conservative",[3] and she has criticized the concepts of political correctness and woke culture in the U.S.,[3] drawing parallels between political correctness in the U.S. and North Korea.
Certainly interesting life path...
-
-
-
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.
-
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?
-
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.
-
that's a quality meme. sad and infuriating news though.
28 comments