this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2024
851 points (99.4% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

9773 readers
292 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

--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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

This case is quite similar with Disney+ case.

You press 'Agree', you lost the right to sue the company.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ZMonster@lemmy.world -3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I appreciate your concerns, but truly: I owe you nothing. It takes very little integrity to make an uninformed allegation and then sit back with a smug look and a mug full of selfrighteousness decrying "prove me wrong".

Why don't you prove Legal Eagle wrong? It would without a doubt be more fruitful because I'm not entertaining it.

[–] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Then why did they attempt to invoke the terms of an unrelated service rather than having the case dismissed outright? Makes no sense.

[–] ZMonster@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Obviously I can't possibly speak as to why they chose to do what they did. But I would assume that making a motion to dismiss due to the fact that arbitration has already been agreed to (seemingly unrelated from your perspective but from a legal perspective is really the only substantive aspect, so wildly related) is far less scandalous than making a motion to dismiss with no recourse for the plaintiff at all and would be far more damaging to their reputation.

And that DOES make sense.

[–] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Right, but if they're not affiliated with the restaurant, then the restaurant doesn't fall under their tos, because they don't own it.

[–] ZMonster@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The restaurant isn't suing them, ding dong. The guy who consented to an arbitration agreement is. Jesus fuck, it is okay to be wrong. I know it sucks. It sucks even more to imagine that Disney might be doing something remotely respectable and have to admit that. But it's okay. I'm wrong all the time. I face it, accept it, learn from it, and move on.

When you are ready to move on, go for it.

[–] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

So they're doing to arbitrate a case on behalf of the store? Makes no sense to think it applies to their arbitration agreement.