Disney trying to say that you can’t sue them after your spouse was shot by Mickey Mouse in broad daylight for no reason because your grandmother once played with a Snow White toy back in the 1930s
Here's the dumbest thing. The husband is not suing Disney. The husband is the executor of the estate. The estate, which is represented by the husband, is suing Disney for wrongful death. The estate never signed up for Disney+. What the husband did and didn't agree to has no bearing on the case.
Exactly. Not to mention, Disney plus didn’t feed his wife nuts. As soon as people start canceling subscriptions and their investors start dropping, Disney will more than likely try to settle to get it to go away. They had such a sociopathic response, this topic won’t be going anywhere for them.
That kinda reminds me of a real life meme that happened a while back... "Your game sucks and it's not fun." "Nuh-uh, astronauts went to the moon so it's your fault for not liking our game."
I like how half of Disney movies and shows are one giant lecture, as if they're our betters and moral arbiters of our society. As usual, it's all just for show.
Anyone who has ever used Disney+ has to second-guess going to Disney parks now because Disney has shown exactly what they'll do when your child is injured or killed as a result of their negligence.
@@ISEEKSPACE so by your reasoning, people with food allergies should never eat out at restaurants or eat any food prepared by anyone else ever? That’s ridiculous people with food allergies go out to eat all the time and it’s perfectly safe. It’s not hard to make a note while you’re taking orders that someone in your party has a food allergy. I’m a server, I should know. it is 100% not her fault. It is 100% not her husband‘s fault. The fault lies exclusively in the server that gave her food that she was allergic to the restaurant and the park itself, a.k.a. Disney. Her husband should sue the ever living shit out of Disney so people start taking life threatening allergies in the food service industry more seriously.
@@HyrosClipsYeah, they’ve had the political reasons, which I don’t really boycott over cause that’s dumb, but I mean you shouldn’t ever get political unless you want to lose 50% of your costumers, but this is beyond that, this is saying it’s ok to ToS roofie people. “ToS roofie” means to hide shit in terms of service that you know the person would never agree to but you also know that your terms are unreasonably long and no one will read.
@@LTPottenger you can be completely right in some scenarios but Disney advertises it’s restaurants as being extremely hospitable to people with allergies
I think it's because they don't want to open the door to lawsuits like this. Edit: A lot of people @ without constructive input. Read @sev1120 reply and you'll understand what I'm getting at.
To admit that they’ve caused someone’s death will cost millions in PR (or at least that’s what the Disney Execs believe. Disney also does their best to make heart attacks officially happen off their land).
Mfw I accidentally sign away my bloodline into slavery because I watched The Clone Wars on Cartoon Network before Disney even purchased Star Wars (they updated their terms & conditions)
They do that shit all the time and send an email out saying it's changing and if you stay signed in then you are accepting automatically. It's actually bullshit.
Man, you’re lucky. I watched the lion King on VHS back in the 90s and when my entire family died because one of the rides malfunctioned at Disney World I tried to sue them and then they counter sued me for $100 million and won.
I did a paper about this a few years ago, how the terms and conditions are unethical. They basically present you with a false premise that you have a choice, but you either agree to their terms or you are not allowed access to whatever it is you're trying to use.
Yup. Any form of denial such as denying cookies or selling your personal information would create so much trouble on the user side. Cooperations will always seek a benefit
This event is vaguely turning into that south park epidose where you dont read the terms and conditions and you waver yoir right away to become a human centipede.
@@eduardoherrera2368Still Terms & Conditions are often intentionally bloated and written in judicical jargon, making it almost impossible for the average consumer to read
@breprince1205 I worked for a company, that was developing like a marketplace type platform for buying marketing services We had to add the "accept/deny cookies" but it was such a pain in the ass, that the actual thing didn't do anything. You click deny - your cookies are still being used, cause this thing was basically made just to calm the business owners down
This happened to my mom. She has celiac, and she went to a restaurant. She saw they had gluten free bread, and ordered it, she asked the staff if it's gluten free, they said. She received the bread and it did not look or smell gluten free. So she asked the staff to ask around back the cook if its gluten free. She once again got a response of, yes it's gluten free. She didn't trust it so she gave me the bread. A staff member saw and asked. She told she knows it's not gluten free. I confirmed that it doesn't taste gluten free. Finally they called the manager and he confirmed that it was in fact NOT GLUTEN FREE. Luckily my mom is smart about these things, but I find it insane that at this world if you have an allergy, you simply can't trust the staff.
I have coeliac disease too, the amount of times restaurants have done this is crazy, I’ve always had to ask for the allergen menu to make sure because half the time waiters don’t know what allergens are in the food
Yeah, unfortunately a lot of staff and companyies out there simply don't care about you or your allergies until they think you may sue. I've had plenty of experiences where I've made it clear I can't have dairy yet I've been served dairy
This case is also kind of important. This clause that you cannot sue the service, its parent company, or affiliates is present in nearly every single terms of service you have ever signed. If the court rules in favor of Disney, then a precedent will be set which will make these companies essentially immune to litigation even in the most extreme of circumstances such as the death of a loved one through extreme negligence or even willful ignorance. It will be a huge win for corporations that will place them even further outside the bounds of the law. They will no longer be obligated to have any quality control or safety standards. They are too large to compete with and now they don't even have to make sure that say, the food they produce is safe to eat.
I feel like that would also encourage corporations likely to make unsafe products to try to force people to sign something at some point, allowing cost-cutting on safety measures. At least in Soylent Green the product was edible.
I know for alot of Video Game ToS lines, the right to litigation when it comes to games covers being sued for bugs, bans for cheating or unwanted behaviors, stuff like that. I cant say i know of a ToS that has something this scummy. In fact, being this is the first we have heard of it, id be suprised if many other companies did something similar at all
My wife is a lawyer said it is unconstitutional to withhold someone’s right to a jury trial. Disney+ has nothing to do with their theme parks. Disney collects money for the business that killed the woman, so yes, they are 100% liable. She employs the husband to lawyer up and do not listen to anything Disney says.
Well they did lawyer up hence the law suit. And since this in FL and not CA, I imagine the courts will rule in the estate/husbands favor to go to trial and not arbitration
The other month I reinstalled Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic, only to get a phonebook sized Disney EULA shoved in my face to agree to for a game I bought before Disney even owned Star Wars. Searching through it reveals that you, too, give up your right to present any case before a judge if you have any claims to make against Disney when you agree to it. For a game that came out 21 years ago. One of the most revolting companies in the world.
Disney would rather pour lots of money into a lawsuit rather than give the man money for what happened to his wife...man Disneys really fucking horrible.
Because if they win this lawsuit, it sets a precedent which can be used to dismiss further lawsuits of a similar type It’s like spending more money in the short term to buy a product outright instead of having to spend lots more money down the road to rent it
@@justadummy8076 This is the real reason why they aren’t just paying out the comparatively small asking price of the lawsuit. They’re better off setting a prescient now for their absurd arbitration clause so they can just say “well it worked last time” for every subsequent case and basically win by default.
@@justadummy8076this is literally a dystopian future we’re living in. It’s worse than a satirical Futurama joke lol. Actual real life South Park moment here.
Reminds me of a case where a prisoner requested a cotton blanket for his cell because he was allergic to the wool the default was made of. The prison refused and a $20,000 lawsuit ensued. Just getting the man his blanket would have cost less than $20.
@@Ef609uih Don't blame the writers. If you want to diverge into a whole conversation why it's the higher-up's(plural) fault for not understanding how cinema is made well(why copying previous movies is usually unsuccessful), and thinking that a small vocal audience "canceling" a movie because of one tiny thing doesn't actually affect box office.
Disney over the last 10-15 years has become one of the most vampiric blood sucking greedy corporations on the planet. All these live action remakes and sequels, MCU and Star Wars falling off, it’s just sad to see
@@TonymeansAnthony nintendo is casually evil to gamers in cartoonish scenarios that at the end of the day don't do much more than annoy communities, disney has literal blood on its hands
@Randomness67 seriously Rats are leagues above shit like this! never once have my rats attempted to lie to me about poisoning me through my food, nor kill me and then tell my wife she's screwed because I signed for their giant rat house in 2020 i might be biased a bit though
Negligence that leads to death should not be protected from their terms similar to how an NDA does not protect from a crime being committed and reported
@@kingdomheartsfan3002 Yeah but what if it was worded really well, even the secret service director can just go 'idk lol' to every question and get off free legally while everyone knows what shes doing, cant be proven, goes free, retires, etc.
@yourdemiseishere Well, that'd be tyrannical and we'd need the people to rise and do something. Won't happen, though. BTW, life is am inalienable Right. It can't just be litigated away.
I remember reading about a guy that scanned the contract, edited out the bs, printed it out, and signed it. The corporation also didn't read it before they signed isn't, and were 17 kinds of pissed off when he later sued them for breech of contract.
@@Llnstead that's assuming it's even there and they didn't just add it in stealthily just then so they can go "Nuh uh" like how your younger sibling does whenever they lose badly to you so they make up some rule on the spot trying to make your win invalid.
i think another point that’s i haven’t heard anyone mention is that large parks, such as disney, do NOT allow you to bring your own food! disney is hot, lots of walking, it’s exhausting and you need to eat. it’s devastating to see people say she chose to gamble with her life when she was probably in fear of a health issue due to LACK of food. disney can act as much as they want like they “cannot prevent cross contamination”, but whether you chose believe that or not… it should be acknowledged that the option for her to safely bring her own food was also taken away from her!
THIS!! You can’t even bring in your own drinks!!! Just a reusable water bottle!! They FORCE you to use their facilities or leave lol which is pointless if you’ve paid? The entire thing has become a risk lmao.
With one google search you can find that you CAN bring food to Disney. Just can't be in a glass container, require heating or refrigeration or have strong smell. They even have a picnic area for you to eat. Don't spread misinformation.
Right? And I’d say it sounds like discrimination if they won’t accommodate people’s food allergies but won’t let them bring their own food, it’s like saying “if you have allergies, you’re not allowed in our park.” Because honestly that’s what they’re doing
Commenting again because my comment got deleted. If you search it on google, you can easily find that you CAN bring food to the park. Let's not say things that aren't true.
This is so damaging for the reputation of Disney, a multi-billion dollar company. I hope the husband keeps up the fight and a judge dismisses that stipulation that has NOTHING to do with their case. That clause should not even be legal in a Disney Plus subscription. Clauses should only apply to what you are signing up for. Not all of their subsidiaries. I hope everyone hears this story. It's both heartbreaking and appalling. And I hope people boycott Disney and cancel their subscriptions to stand with this family. Also for their own protection to get that clause removed from Disney Plus subscriptions.
give this man a like, that husband can't give up, do it for her man, do it for her. Fuck Disney. Edit: Also thanks for the likes, (not just to me, to @justarandombelugafan) really spreading the message
The only way I can see this continuing is if he can get funding from people online, and even that would just to be attempting to spread awareness as I doubt Disney would lose money or the court case
It's funny when the two most "family friendly" companies are the two companies most likely to spit in the face of family when it comes to their money. Disney and Nintendo, if it wasn't clear
Like charlie said, enough people will defend disney where it wont matter and people will forget about it and keep watching disney movies and going to their parks
No contract should be able to sign away a human being’s rights. That is inhuman and disgusting, any contract that attempts to pry away the signer’s rights as determined by a judge should be irrevocably null and void. Being paid your due by someone who has wronged you is, by law, our rights as a citizen of this country, and a Disney contract should never be stronger than the consumer’s rights outlined by the law. And I don’t think it would hold up in court, regardless of what the Supreme Court had to say about it.
As somebody who has a deathly allergy to shrimp and shellfish, Disney has always been known as the best place for allergies. They have always been super accommodating for allergies. So for ppl saying it’s her fault she shouldn’t eat at a restaurant Disney is known for being accommodating for allergies
You gonna cancel your Disney+ now and stop giving them money? I see so many people saying Disney is evil and shame on them, yet they keep giving them their money, Charlie included
Okay but really they aren't. The decedent bought a ticket; tickets also have arbitration clauses. The attachment to disney plus is just padding for the executor himself, it has very little bearing on the case, its included as a catch all to predefeat any argument they try to use that says they shouldn't have to arbitrate because of other agreements... Its very very normal for every company to have arbitration clauses on their tickets...
I have severe food allergies, and have had to go the ER several times for them because of cross-contamination or other mistakes on the part of restaurants. I HAVE NEVER had to sue any restaurants, every time I had a severe reaction, the restaurant owner was extremely apologetic and willing to pay for the ER bill. Disney is genuinely evil, why wouldn’t they just pay for funeral expenses quietly and avoid all the public backlash? This hurts them more than helps them.
Is beyond just paying the damage now even if they tried apologising for what they had done they could not do much here they have shown us how much power Disney have over us a simple terms and conditions are helping them get away with this
@@quattuorvigintupletritrigi8357 Do you have some "time" to make some "popcorn" "online"? You know, just a little ABC, "XYZ" if you catch my meaning? Of course, you would need to make some "time" AFTER "popcorn" if you wanna catch said flix "online" at the end, but I'm sure in that order you'll find what you are looking for. Maybe.
There's something I don't get. How can you say the restaurant has no affiliation with Disney while using Disney's terms and conditions to defend for said restaurant? You can't have it both ways
I think the husband has to sue the restaurant owners. It’s fucked up but technically that’s just a business on disney owned shopping center. it’d be like suing the landlord of any other restaurant instead of the business owner
There is no penalty for piling 50 laughable arguments on top of one core decent argument. But not doing so *could* result in some technicality you didn't see coming, or bad luck & a nutty judge / jury, and then you lose the case. So you throw *everything* you can think of - including absolutely laughable trash tier nonsense. It's a complete waste of everyone's time, yes, but it's very common. People can get penalized for entirely frivolous filings, but not for adding bucket loads of frivolous crap to one halfway decent argument.
@@Refrigerator410Actually I don't think it's fucked up to sue the restaurant. I don't know the deal that Disney has with them but in the end the staff of the restaurant not only made a massive mistake, they were warned enough that it almost seems on purpose.
The husband isn’t even asking for like a million dollars from them. He’s just asking for 50K! Most likely to pay for funeral arrangements or to get some other things sorted out after just losing his wife. Plus $50,000 to a 100 Billion Dollar company like Disney is less than nothing! That’s literally like pennies for them so why are they fighting so hard on this? At this point I am convinced they do this just to be cruel.
I think its to not have a mark of a death being caused by them kn their property. Which is like trying to keep ocean waters from washing away a sand castle. I hope as the generations get older, they stop caring about Disney. They treat their employees and customers like garbage.
They are fighting the lawsuit because it would ruin the already terrible name of the corporation, Disney would be a better company if their first reaction to seeing their characters wasnt a law suit, what's worse is that 50k in damages was damages on the wife(RIP) who had never agreed to anything about disney+ and 50k is practically chump change for Disney.
@@anitajonska8902Yeah you have no idea how litigation works pal, if they we’re doing this to save their reputation they’d pay him the $50K and settle before the guy ever needed to sue and no one would know about it.
this takes me back the the south park human centipad episode where in order to sign up for the ipad account snuck in there was you are signing your life away to this human experiment based on the human centipede... and the whole catch phrase of the episode was "well it was in the terms & conditions" "well i didnt read them" "YOU DIDNT READ THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS!!!!???"
Absolutely concerning how corporations like Disney maneuver to evade responsibility. It's heartbreaking to hear about such incidents, and even more so when justice is so blatantly circumvented.
Fr they think just because they put it in the TOS it overrides the rule of law 😂. To claim they aren’t responsible for her death at their park because they have Disney+ is the most insane thing ive ever heard. I didn’t know Disneys TOS overrides government 😂
Exactly! I hear this story and I want to stay focused on it but I can't help but think about every other injustice I've seen committed by companies for the sake of money, even stuff I went through myself. This guy is going to win, period, but how many people can't afford to sue places like disney or Walmart in the first place?
You can't enforce terms that are unreasonable to a certain degree. The husband is allegedly unable to sue Disney because of the Disney+ free trial. Imagine if specific people on a police department were unable to investigate Disney because they had used Disney+. It would be absurd. Edit: Charlie brings up a good point in the video. The husband had used Disney+, but the now passed (respectfully RIP) wife never agreed to any arbitration clause. Because the damages are to the wife/the husband is acting on the wife's behalf, the arbitration clause is even more unreasonable and would no way hold up in a court of law.
"You can't enforce terms that are unreasonable to a certain degree." unfortunately this is completely within law, Discord has in their ToS you can't sue them if you use their service too, same goes for Google, and UA-cam, etc
Even so it would still be unreasonable, don't quote me but I've heard of cases like roblox where is the person hasn't read it or smth or are a child where they are knowingly unlikely to read it, the contract is null and void. So even so it should not be allowed, another thing to add is gross negligence - massive bodily harm or death ignores there contracts so. They are still able to sue based on those two precedents set by previous court. Also for disney saying it's not their fault their system is very similar to mcdonalds and someone still is able to sue mcdonalds due to how they all train from mcdonalds thingy,
the problem is you can drag out cases so much they can make him go bankrupt. plus its crazy that they dont need to pay the fees for the winning party...
@@AlwaysThirstys very incorrect, I've looked into most lawsuits towards Roblox myself, and their contract/ToS has never been null or void in any of their cases, most lawsuits come from parents that had been ripped off or worried about their child's safety and privacy, music artist, artist, and other companies sueing for copyright infringement
Waivers, contracts, leases, EULAs, etc. literally do not protect companies from legal repercussions for criminal negligence and law-breaking, no matter what the document says. Hope the guy gets as much as he can out of Disney, I’d be absolutely inconsolable in his position
I’m a bartender. When someone says it’s an allergy I make sure I tell the manager and kitchen so the kitchen does allergy protocol and the manager observes. I’ve sadly had a lot of people fake allergies and I feel like it makes people with actual severe allergies (including me) sound like we are making a big deal out of nothing which sucks. No matter what even if the person says they have a gluten allergy and need gluten free bread while chugging down blue moons and wheat beer I make sure the kitchen follows allergy protocols.
Blue tool time sucks but is very necessary. I couldn’t imagine killing someone because I was too lazy to follow allergy protocols. The guilt would kill me even if their TOS protected me 😂
@@kc_jones_gamingyour allergy stuff is blue? That's funny, here in the UK blue chopping boards and knifes are for raw fish and shellfish and we use purple for allergy orders
As someone with severe nut allergies, restaurants in America have always been such a nightmare. I have fully stopped going to any because of how many bad experiences I have had. One time they put nuts on top of my food, when I asked them to remake it, they just scraped off the nuts and gave it back to me still fully contaminated. It's truly horrible how bad allergies are treated in the US
@@Ravakeksis It should be, I think people just don't know how severe food allergies are. Most people assume allergies and being intolerant of something are the same I've noticed. A lot of "Oh so you just get a stomach ache?" when people ask me about my allergies
my friend worked for Disney and dislocated her knee while working. they wouldn't give her workers comp and fired her. they didn't compensate her pay for her appointments and her possible if needed. surgery. I found out that it was illegal to do so but they said" we are Disney. we have a lot of money you don't you can't sue us"
@@fadedpurple7434 ah yes... the vague "my friend did X and got Y story" so... did she displocate it doing something stupid like jumping around when shes should be behind a counter selling tickets? no joke but technical stuff like this happens all the time and can be denied componsation. you can be denied coverage if you didnt wear protective gloves / eyewear in warehouse settings.
I was hit by a firework from Disneyland that fell out of the sky. I was on Ball road, next to Disneyland when the fireworks started raining down from their nightly fireworks show. They chose to do the fireworks show on a windy day. I was hit in the back of the leg as I was running away for tree cover which sent me to the ground. The back of my leg was black for a week and it hurt to walk. I inquired about doing a lawsuit to get money from a lawyer but he told me Disney lawyers fight absolutely everything tooth and nail and it would cost me more to sue than I would be awarded so it wasn't worth my time. I complained to customer service at Disneyland and they offered to give me a free park ticket when I showed them the firework canister and my leg, but I had to sign away my right to sue them to get it. I don't know if I signed away my right to sue for anything for forever or just for the firework hitting me, but after seeing this story, I assume I signed away my right to sue about unrelated things in exchange for a disney park ticket. They own so much stuff at so many properties now, signing away the right to sue for everything for forever would kinda suck. It's evil.
Disney: Anti-American Corporate Overseas Proxy Terrorist. They bought and mauled timeless stories and characters as a prelude to war. China-bought company.
yah and if you would have declined their offer, they would have tried sueing you to make you an example basically. is how companies operate. so smart move taking the ticket.
as a person with VERY severe allergies to major foods (eggs, nuts, chicken, turkey, all seafood) this makes me SOOOO MAD. like are you serious?? people calling it ‘gambling’ your life?? disney making these weird ass agreements?? they asked multiple times if it was allergen free and they said yeah. this gotta be illegal cause what. so fucked up
I’m sorry. it must feel like nothing is safe for you. I know someone with celiac’s disease (so she can’t eat gluten without getting sick) and she constantly gets crap for it - one time she was just given something with gluten in it anyway. and that’s not even a fraction of what you must deal with. people treat accommodating allergies like it’s an inconvenience when it’s literally a matter of life or death for some people. we need to be better.
I always read terms of agreement. I've been told I'm just paranoid, but I've always said it's just a matter of time until companies try to pull something shady
This story hits really close to home for me, I'm a med school student at UT Southwestern, and my wife is DEATHLY allergic to pecans and walnuts. If I lost my wife, I'd lose myself. I hope this man can find peace in his loss, and I hope Disney is held responsible for this sickening behavior.
Reading these comments tells me there is MASSIVE work to be done in the allergy PR world. People are so ignorant and ableist. "If your allergy is so severe just live at home!", these people would rip the surgical mask off of a child cancer patient if it slightly irked them. Epi fails 1 in 10 times it's used, and, as someone with anaphylaxis risk myself knows, there is no such thing as categorically avoiding all exposure.
You might’ve already heard of it but I’d look into or ask a doctor about if immunotherapy is an option. I also have a ton of allergies but I’ve been treated so they’re not so deadly.
@@amlodipine4250 Assuming that someone is bragging just because they mention something impressive is mega cringe. Stop assuming bad intent when it's not there.
He's suing on behalf of HER estate, so it's like SHE'S suing. They shouldn't be able to use something he signed against her! What is wrong with these idiots at the restaurant?? I'll never sign up for anything again cuz i can't read all that fine print. But there are other reasons it won't work.
Basically what Disney is implying is that you should pirate their sht because if you sign up for a Disney+ account and do the right thing, you will have no legal recourse against them if they do you terribly wrong. The pirates who get Disney stuff for free have more rights against Disney than their paying customers do, lmao
Corporations behaving like their contracts are law is why people think “well, you signed the contract.” There’s no contractual cover for criminal negligence, it’s just not how that works. Disney could have a contract that says “if you watch our shows then you agree to never sue us” which you sign in front of a dozen lawyers, and it would not matter because it doesn’t give them carte blanche to then break the law by killing people. These companies will throw money at stuff to bully people into believing they’re unassailable. I hope this guy gets as much as he possibly can. Disney are unashamedly evil.
@@deifiedtitanthe sad thing is that disney has more money than many small nations, just look at what they did to copyright laws, I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years this kind of bullshit TOS actually became actively enforced and protected by laws
This shit is not going to fly in EU since they have rules that you can't have a 1 sided contract Sadly this is happen in US so 80% chances that they are fucked.
I remember reading the story when it came out. My first thought was something along the lines of "Holy shit I can't believe legal counsel had the absolute balls to try that as a strategy in open court", especially when you consider that the restaurant (Located in Disney Springs) does not even require a ticket to enter in the first place, making the ticket purchase and disney+ arbitration clauses they're trying to convince the court with an extremely hard sell if not outright moot since you can enter without a ticket or a disney+ sub, even if you somehow buy into the **CATEGORICALLY INSANE** idea that negligence leading into a wrongful death is something that should be sent to arbitration in the first place.
Oof, I think the restaurant being in a non-ticketed/open to anyone area should be a much bigger point, this is the first I'm hearing of this, and is honestly probably the best defense the husband has as to why he didn't/shouldn't have to go to arbitration
The resturaunt is actualy criminaly liable for manslaughter. You cant arbitrate out of criminal charges. This is insane and shows that the mega corps have no accountability under the law.
@@ecoonrad4753Why should it matter? If someone agrees that they will resolve any dispute with Disney via arbitration, then why would the location matter? The agreement had no such condition.
Random UA-camr with 2 law degrees here. Just want to say that terms and conditions (at least in UK law) are not solid legal documents and protect companies from everything. For example, there was a successful precedent set here in the UK where a person purchased a train ticket and on the back on the ticket was listed T&Cs in tiny writing, there was an incdient and when the individual tried to sue the train company said he couldn't because by purchasing the ticket he would be aware of the T&Cs on the ticket he was carrying. However in law you are compared to the 'reasonable man' meaning, would a reasonable, sound of mind person read those T&Cs and assume this, and the courts found no, most people would not read the back of the ticket after purchase. The same would apply here, this is not reasonable, and therefore this case would apply. Again, this was a UK case, US law I am uncertain of, but just wanted to share my two cents on the matter! I hope the husband can find some peace after this tragedy. It is all very heart breaking.
@@KenzaSheepwhat are you talking about. Click-wrap gets thrown out by courts in the US all the time. I graduated from law school in the US and there are plenty of similar cases to those mentioned by GOT in the UK.
From what i can tell, Corporations use TOS's as a means of deterrence more than a legitimate defense. Most people would balk at the prospect of suing a company if they see that arbitration is a required substitute.
People also forget all the family wanted was 50 thousand dollars… this is POCKET CHANGE for Disney. Normally people ask for millions so I don’t get why wouldn’t they just pay it
disney doesn’t operate or own the restaurant, are you gonna sue disney if you go to one of their parks and someone attacks you, just bc it’s on their property does not automatically make them liable to something that happens
@@jasonb1e732 Bro why are you defending multi billion dollar corporations? Who the fuck cares if fucking disney has to pay. A person fucking died and you're over here talking about "Well the restaurant has to pay not Disney" like it's going to change ANYTHING about the fact that the "Disneyland" restaurant caused a person to die and they are trying to put off the blame instead of paying 50k for funeral costs
2:55 I wrote the terms and services for a website once. I put a bunch of random stuff like "if we come to you in the middle of the night asking for a favor, you will nod and hand us 50,000 dollars without further question." peppered through boring parts about data collected is only for internal use blah blah blah you agree that if you ever find a Genie Lamp, you will give me two of your three wishes... Took them 2 years after I left to find it.
man youre lucky you didnt get caught, you could have gotten yourself and the whole company in a major shit hole. people love taking advantage of corpos and if they saw something like that they would fight tooth and nail to get whatever that disclaimer claimed. and they wouldnt be in the wrong
Crazy how protected some people are too. My mom died because of a doctor who prescribed her migraine medication without reading the labelling. My mother had high blood pressure, and the medication label warned about serious injury or death if taken by those with high blood pressure. The doctors slowly killed her and were found innocent in court.
5:42 As I get older, this is what I've started realizing. Corruption is as rampant as it is simply because the average person can't afford the legal fees to fight back
I saw this story on Twitter a few days ago and it's absolutely infuriating. Any rational person would understand that a streaming service agreement doesn't apply to a resort restaurant.
it's all the same company, you agree'd to it's terms, that's the law in stone, I get why people can be mad over this, but at the same time do you guys really think companies are gonna sit there, and be consumed by a nation of lawsuits?
@@infinitehexington What does a streaming service agreement have to do with poisoning a tourist? She went to an allergy free restaurant and verified multiple times that her food did not contain allergens. They accidentally poisoned her and now they're using the Disney+ terms of service as a defense. What the heck?
@@infinitehexington that's not the point. it's that the terms you agree to while signing up to a trial of a streaming service and when visiting a park should be entirely distinct sets of terms
@@JadonKaiser "What the heck?" - the uneducated. It's not just a streaming agreement, it's an agreement with Disney as a whole, Disney is one entity, one company, that agreement with Disney stands for every service offered by Disney, and I believe Disney states this within their agreement.
@@kh-ro5su well that's an opinion of yours, not really a point, and by stating your opinion is a point for an argument about law, terms, and agreements is doomed from the beginning.
I'm a chef and accommodating allergies is NOT my favorite past time but I go above and beyond to make sure I don't fckn kill someone for wanting to enjoy a dinner out!! It's beyond me the restaurant staff let this happen much less the company covering for them. Anyone with the mentality "well, if the allergy could be lethal maybe they shouldn't eat out" is immediately not working in my kitchen and doesn't even need waste their time with that argument in the replies. He could skip the lawsuit and go for criminal charges actually.
It’s so astounding to me that a company worth billions can’t just accept responsibility and pay whatever cost is deemed acceptable by the court and husband. Admit your mistake, own up to it, and terminate the employments of anyone directly responsible for what happened. Honest and integrity is lost on these greedy corporate clowns
This reminds me of the first episode of TheBoys where Hughie's girlfriend accidentally got killed by A-Train and Vought tries to give him a small compensation. Except, Disney ain't even trying to compensate at all 💀
disney after telling a grieving parent they cant have spiderman on their deceased child's tombstone and suing them for a gatrillion dollars and winning
I feel like that is probably satire. Disney doesn't own spider man, and they probably never will since Sony owns permanent rights to spider man, where they can do whatever they want with him and Disney has to bend over backwards to even get him to appear in their media.
Suing someone isn't a human right though. What needs to happen is arbitration needs to be banned and court systems need to be reworked to reduce the massive load on the legal system. Currently, 1% of all claims actually go to court, and the court system is already overloaded.
When I was a child, I never thought I’d live long enough to view Disney as a villain. Now as an adult, it’s just another sad day in the world realizing that this is the norm for most if not all businesses.
The 2010s birthed the most cancerous toxic "Shareholders first" businesses across the world, degrading goods and services' quality for more margin. sick of this
Your wife died because of a restaurant in Disney, and their first counter argument is "you can't sue us because you made a free trial account on Disney+"
no... their first response was them saying that they do not own or operate the restaurant and they are just landlords who had no influence over the restaurant or their staff.
The lack of accountability here is deeply disturbing and creates a dangerous precedent. Thanks for breaking down this complex issue so effectively, your analysis has certainly opened up my eyes to the sneaky tactics these companies employ.
Contracts don't protect against being sued for wrong-doing. They clearly state consequences of breach of terms. In this case, the contract was voided due to negligence, resulting in loss of life. The disney corp can't say a party signs away their rights to sue for loss of life due to negligence. They can only prove that no negligence occurred. And since the woman involved died, negligence very obviously occurred.
@@walmart3024 unless you’re a registered developer, you can’t fit 60+ pages of a TOS onto ChatGPT. If you have a slow computer, it’s unreasonable to copy and paste everything over if an algorithm (or AI) can independently view it, process, and send you what’s needed.
@@SamsarasArt Not only that, a corporation isn't just one person doing the entire job by itself, there are plenty of people on the table as well. Once they start pointing fingers at eachother things'll get interesting, real interesting.
The fact that he only wanted to sue for only 50k makes it even more vile. Disney is MASSIVE and worth BILLIONS on top of BILLIONS. Should be a litteral drop in the bucket for them
I still don't know how 50k would be enough or how it's estimated. It sounds terrible because right now (to me) it's sounding like her life or accidental death is worth 50k. It feels right if the 50k is the value estimated for his healing(like therapy, or some debts, something to make his life better) is that what the 50k is for?
Last year I broke my knee at Disney. Before I even received any medical attention of any sort, they had the lawyers come up to me and my boyfriend and interrogated the hell out of us while I was practically screaming in pain. They even separated us to try and get answers from us individually- which made me freak out even more because I'm autistic and having my boyfriend close by was the only thing that was able to get me to even slightly calm down. I could go on and on about how horrible of an experience it was but it would take a whole essay to explain everything. But anyways, everyone was pressuring me to try and sue Disney because we didn't know if the injury would affect me long term or not. I must have had a gut feeling, because I never did attempt to sue. While I was bedridden (for about a month and a half), I heard about this Disney Springs story and was shocked. I'm glad the husband is fighting, I hope he gets the outcome that we all hope he will, even after all of this Disney+ bullshit that they're trying to pull on him.
I am so sorry about what happened to you!! I'm also neurodivergent and can't even imagine how awful the entire experience had been for you. Did your injury heal up alright?
If disney can't be sued, then the person who told them that their food didnt have any mentioned allergens and the cook should be charged for negligence and indirect murder
Im pretty sure punitive damages isnt often or ever to the amount a suit is filed for, its actually the jury and then the judges discretion on how much to actually award As such whilst it could be a start of $50k, the jury could say "20 million" and then the judge could just further overule that and say "thats far too low, 400 million" or even say less than 50 grand. Pretty sure i might be paraphrasing a legal eagle video, but regardless the ammount sued for is often just there to eye grab if its like...1 billion
@@DaCaLsTa7777I heard the same thing on a legal commentary channel. Something about it being a lawsuit for a minimum of 50k otherwise it would have to go to small claims court.
Nah, they are just like any ordinary corporation. They won't empty out their pockets to the people they get their money from, only to themselves for other corporations or projects they are working on.
I have a dairy allergy just like her, and I have always had to be super conscious of eating out at places where I don't know how the food is prepared or what's in it, so getting the very rare "we'll accommodate your allergies" to completely ignoring them is such a slap in the face of trust to the consumer, it's terrifying and Disney needs to be held accountable for this.
as someone who spent a number of years in restaurants, a scenario you can promise a product not only doesn't contain, but has not been even remotely contaminated by an allergen, is extremely unrealistic. I'm genuinely curious if this restaurant is ignoring straight up health codes, judging from an already gaping lack of health concern.
The amount of times I’m expected to just not eat because of my food allergies is crazy. It’s hard to enjoy yourself when your stomach is grumbling and you’re lightheaded and dizzy.
disney is not at fault... it was not a disney restaurant, it was a 3rd party that rents land from disney. they have no control or influence over the restaurant or their staff, they should be suing the restaurant as they are the only people who are truly responsible for this colossal fuckup. you dont sue the land owners when a mcdonalds sells you something you are allergic to, you sue the mcdonalds.
I’m a bartender and I always make sure it’s taken seriously. I feel like the rise of people saying they have an allergy but don’t because they don’t want to eat a certain thing or don’t like it has made people take allergies less seriously and that sucks for people like us with allergies. I have a severe bee allergy and when I get panicked around bees some of my friends and coworkers roll their eyes and it’s like Karen I will literally die if I’m stung.
@@Honeybeerose88 Nah this isn't an issue. If someone says they have an allergy it does not really matter if they do or not, because you should be prepared to accommodate the request anyway. Why is it any of your business if someone will die from peanut exposure or is simply picky? edit: of course "you" is not referring to you personally, I mean the people who say that
I talked to someone who used to work at Disney land and he said if someone is having health issues or gets injured, the security will remove you from the property so they technically can’t be sued since they were no longer on the property if someone was unfortunate enough to pass away or have an injury become worse.
As someone with food allergies, the website for the restaurant in question is upsetting. You click the menu and there’s an immediate disclaimer about gluten/other food allergies is just.. so rude? Especially given that the steps they mention to do if you have food allergies are exactly what this woman did.
Disney trying to say that you can’t sue them after your spouse was shot by Mickey Mouse in broad daylight for no reason because your grandmother once played with a Snow White toy back in the 1930s
“Should have read the fine print 😡 “
@@EstherEclipsefuck the fine print read this strap mickey
@@EstherEclipse should've read the fine print my friend, you should've read the fiiine print
@@nathanpierce7681Sign here, here, and initials here. Welcome to the family.
Imagine a bank robbery with mickey mouse mask and themed guns and van
Prolly Disney will protect those guys from jail time 😂
Here's the dumbest thing.
The husband is not suing Disney.
The husband is the executor of the estate.
The estate, which is represented by the husband, is suing Disney for wrongful death.
The estate never signed up for Disney+.
What the husband did and didn't agree to has no bearing on the case.
THIS !!!!!
Sad thing is Disney will bury it in money
annnd your honor i rest my case
Exactly. Not to mention, Disney plus didn’t feed his wife nuts. As soon as people start canceling subscriptions and their investors start dropping, Disney will more than likely try to settle to get it to go away. They had such a sociopathic response, this topic won’t be going anywhere for them.
@@Bankai2169they will settle
“You literally killed my wife!!!”
“Yeah, but you *did* watch the Mandalorian back in 2020, so it’s kinda on you”
Mandelorian. That’s the one they decided. It is on them lol no that’s absurd lol.
That kinda reminds me of a real life meme that happened a while back...
"Your game sucks and it's not fun."
"Nuh-uh, astronauts went to the moon so it's your fault for not liking our game."
😮
That's Basically What They're Saying.
I like how half of Disney movies and shows are one giant lecture, as if they're our betters and moral arbiters of our society. As usual, it's all just for show.
Anyone who has ever used Disney+ has to second-guess going to Disney parks now because Disney has shown exactly what they'll do when your child is injured or killed as a result of their negligence.
Disney did nothing wrong.
"This is were the fun begins."
It was the lady's negligence not theirs. If you're deathly allergic to food, eating at a restaurant is probably NOT the safest bet. Obviously, right?
@@ISEEKSPACE Sadly again.
@@ISEEKSPACE so by your reasoning, people with food allergies should never eat out at restaurants or eat any food prepared by anyone else ever? That’s ridiculous people with food allergies go out to eat all the time and it’s perfectly safe. It’s not hard to make a note while you’re taking orders that someone in your party has a food allergy. I’m a server, I should know. it is 100% not her fault. It is 100% not her husband‘s fault. The fault lies exclusively in the server that gave her food that she was allergic to the restaurant and the park itself, a.k.a. Disney. Her husband should sue the ever living shit out of Disney so people start taking life threatening allergies in the food service industry more seriously.
The irresponsibility of saying that the food is nut free to someone who is deathly allergic while not being sure if it is, is absolutely disgusting.
@@cagelocker7945 we just needa start boycotting these big organizations taking advantage of us
time to boycott 🫡
@@HyrosClipsYeah, they’ve had the political reasons, which I don’t really boycott over cause that’s dumb, but I mean you shouldn’t ever get political unless you want to lose 50% of your costumers, but this is beyond that, this is saying it’s ok to ToS roofie people.
“ToS roofie” means to hide shit in terms of service that you know the person would never agree to but you also know that your terms are unreasonably long and no one will read.
@@LTPottengerso you’re saying it’s not the restaurants fault? Cuz if so you’re wrong
@@LTPottenger you can be completely right in some scenarios but Disney advertises it’s restaurants as being extremely hospitable to people with allergies
The worst part is the lawsuit was initially just for 50K to cover funeral costs… That is literally pocket change for Disney, but they STILL won’t pay
Even if it was a billion dollars, they can quickly settle it.
I think it's because they don't want to open the door to lawsuits like this.
Edit: A lot of people @ without constructive input. Read @sev1120 reply and you'll understand what I'm getting at.
fuq that, I say make 'em pay a cool mil. 50k my @$$, someone should get locked up over this.
@@Portfelio They don't want to open door for consequences of their actions
To admit that they’ve caused someone’s death will cost millions in PR (or at least that’s what the Disney Execs believe. Disney also does their best to make heart attacks officially happen off their land).
Mfw I accidentally sign away my bloodline into slavery because I watched The Clone Wars on Cartoon Network before Disney even purchased Star Wars (they updated their terms & conditions)
They do that shit all the time and send an email out saying it's changing and if you stay signed in then you are accepting automatically. It's actually bullshit.
Welp time to sail the 7 seas of the Internet
@@skootergirl22 Actually valid reason to pirate. To not sign away your entire life because you want to watch a movie
Man, you’re lucky. I watched the lion King on VHS back in the 90s and when my entire family died because one of the rides malfunctioned at Disney World I tried to sue them and then they counter sued me for $100 million and won.
oopsies
I did a paper about this a few years ago, how the terms and conditions are unethical. They basically present you with a false premise that you have a choice, but you either agree to their terms or you are not allowed access to whatever it is you're trying to use.
Yup. Any form of denial such as denying cookies or selling your personal information would create so much trouble on the user side. Cooperations will always seek a benefit
This event is vaguely turning into that south park epidose where you dont read the terms and conditions and you waver yoir right away to become a human centipede.
I mean... it's sadly a point on favor of every illegal streaming service. You *don't have* to subscribe; you could if you want but it's not a "must".
@@eduardoherrera2368Still Terms & Conditions are often intentionally bloated and written in judicical jargon, making it almost impossible for the average consumer to read
@breprince1205
I worked for a company, that was developing like a marketplace type platform for buying marketing services
We had to add the "accept/deny cookies" but it was such a pain in the ass, that the actual thing didn't do anything. You click deny - your cookies are still being used, cause this thing was basically made just to calm the business owners down
This happened to my mom.
She has celiac, and she went to a restaurant.
She saw they had gluten free bread, and ordered it, she asked the staff if it's gluten free, they said.
She received the bread and it did not look or smell gluten free.
So she asked the staff to ask around back the cook if its gluten free.
She once again got a response of, yes it's gluten free.
She didn't trust it so she gave me the bread.
A staff member saw and asked.
She told she knows it's not gluten free.
I confirmed that it doesn't taste gluten free.
Finally they called the manager and he confirmed that it was in fact NOT GLUTEN FREE.
Luckily my mom is smart about these things, but I find it insane that at this world if you have an allergy, you simply can't trust the staff.
This is terrifiying
Jesus.
I'm so glad your mom is okay
I have coeliac disease too, the amount of times restaurants have done this is crazy, I’ve always had to ask for the allergen menu to make sure because half the time waiters don’t know what allergens are in the food
Yeah, unfortunately a lot of staff and companyies out there simply don't care about you or your allergies until they think you may sue. I've had plenty of experiences where I've made it clear I can't have dairy yet I've been served dairy
“I got hit by a car at Disneyland!!”
“Yeah but you watched cars back in 2006 so that’s on you bud”
Not how it works, but still funny
@@Schrader_myguy for Disney it is.
@@giorgaras1851 lmao true
@@Schrader_myguy correct, that is not how it is supposed to work, and yet here we are
TURBOTASTIC!
Disney legally executing me after I called the newest Marvel film slop because I didnt read the fine print when I went to Disneyland in 1998
lmao
😂😂😂😂😂
Least insane disney counter argument
Disney broadcast live execution, because someone scratch his ball in front Mickey mouse.
Disney is making around 20 mil every two hours
This case is also kind of important. This clause that you cannot sue the service, its parent company, or affiliates is present in nearly every single terms of service you have ever signed. If the court rules in favor of Disney, then a precedent will be set which will make these companies essentially immune to litigation even in the most extreme of circumstances such as the death of a loved one through extreme negligence or even willful ignorance. It will be a huge win for corporations that will place them even further outside the bounds of the law. They will no longer be obligated to have any quality control or safety standards. They are too large to compete with and now they don't even have to make sure that say, the food they produce is safe to eat.
I feel like that would also encourage corporations likely to make unsafe products to try to force people to sign something at some point, allowing cost-cutting on safety measures.
At least in Soylent Green the product was edible.
Just like pharmaceutical products
Going back to the time when Upton Sinclair published "The Jungle" I see...
I know for alot of Video Game ToS lines, the right to litigation when it comes to games covers being sued for bugs, bans for cheating or unwanted behaviors, stuff like that. I cant say i know of a ToS that has something this scummy. In fact, being this is the first we have heard of it, id be suprised if many other companies did something similar at all
Oh man that's a scary thought
Disney has a lawsuit for literally everything. Didn’t they stop a kid from putting spiderman on his gravestone after he died from cancer?
im p sure they did :((
In simplified lamens terms, yes. Exactly that .
Yeah they did it was horrible
they did
WHAT???
My wife is a lawyer said it is unconstitutional to withhold someone’s right to a jury trial. Disney+ has nothing to do with their theme parks. Disney collects money for the business that killed the woman, so yes, they are 100% liable. She employs the husband to lawyer up and do not listen to anything Disney says.
Nobody should ever listen to a word Disney says
well you can blame the awesome supreme court we have who have made it easier for arbitration clauses
Well they did lawyer up hence the law suit. And since this in FL and not CA, I imagine the courts will rule in the estate/husbands favor to go to trial and not arbitration
But suing Disney makes no sense though. He should be suing the restaurant directly. The restaurant is not owned or operated by Disney.
@@FutureMartian97 the restaurant is own by disney. so yes this is on them
Its literally the south park episode lol "you agreed to all of this!!"
You didn’t read the terms and conditions?
Yup the Apple centipede 💀
Pretty much 🤣😤😜
I was thinking the same shit while watching this🤣😭
Human CentiPad
The other month I reinstalled Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic, only to get a phonebook sized Disney EULA shoved in my face to agree to for a game I bought before Disney even owned Star Wars.
Searching through it reveals that you, too, give up your right to present any case before a judge if you have any claims to make against Disney when you agree to it. For a game that came out 21 years ago.
One of the most revolting companies in the world.
True. In this case Disney is innocent though.
@@user-hn78i8so8chow?
@@user-hn78i8so8cexplain
No they're not , that restaurant was specifically for allergy issues and they failed in the most unexcusable way @@user-hn78i8so8c
It’s still criminal negligence. The law is always above a contract
Disney would rather pour lots of money into a lawsuit rather than give the man money for what happened to his wife...man Disneys really fucking horrible.
Because if they win this lawsuit, it sets a precedent which can be used to dismiss further lawsuits of a similar type
It’s like spending more money in the short term to buy a product outright instead of having to spend lots more money down the road to rent it
They use it as an example. Pretty much sue us and go broke
@@justadummy8076 This is the real reason why they aren’t just paying out the comparatively small asking price of the lawsuit. They’re better off setting a prescient now for their absurd arbitration clause so they can just say “well it worked last time” for every subsequent case and basically win by default.
@@justadummy8076this is literally a dystopian future we’re living in. It’s worse than a satirical Futurama joke lol. Actual real life South Park moment here.
It so dumb also it a dictatorship don't just fear government when they get sus fear corporate too
Reminds me of a case where a prisoner requested a cotton blanket for his cell because he was allergic to the wool the default was made of. The prison refused and a $20,000 lawsuit ensued. Just getting the man his blanket would have cost less than $20.
Go make an sfm bro
Thats crazy
@@cndvdxyhjblbilg
Wait, yeah, holy shit! I remember this guy’s stuff. That’s wild to find him here.
Ego.
Please man its been 5 years
disney:
- kills woman
- says "fuck you lmao"
- refuses to elaborate
- makes dog shit show
Nah fr tho, Tf the writers even thinking
Disney: "You subscribed to Disney+ at 2019, so case closed. It's over!"
Husband: "What the fuck?"
@@Ef609uih Don't blame the writers. If you want to diverge into a whole conversation why it's the higher-up's(plural) fault for not understanding how cinema is made well(why copying previous movies is usually unsuccessful), and thinking that a small vocal audience "canceling" a movie because of one tiny thing doesn't actually affect box office.
thats not how quotes work
And then virtue signals
Disney: gets sued for death
Also Disney: you watched a millisecond of a Disney advertisement, not our problem
That's not what is happening here. Have you every read the back of your Theme Park Ticket. Not just DIsney
@@TELEVISIONARCHIVES no cause I have never gone to Disney
@@TELEVISIONARCHIVESr/wooosh
Disney over the last 10-15 years has become one of the most vampiric blood sucking greedy corporations on the planet. All these live action remakes and sequels, MCU and Star Wars falling off, it’s just sad to see
Do I say more than Nintendo? Or just as much as Nintendo?
@TonymeansAnthony nintendos bad but Disney is slowly inching to as bad as then
@@TonymeansAnthony nintendo is casually evil to gamers in cartoonish scenarios that at the end of the day don't do much more than annoy communities, disney has literal blood on its hands
brother theyve been bad people for a while
@@peiceofshmitegamer2317what did nintendo do that is worse than this?? like nintendo is an asshole company but did they ever do smth that topped that
Disney needs to change their nickname from "The House of Mouse" to "The Rat Shack" at this point.
Well said
Naw rats are super friendly and will help rats in the wild for literally no reason other than sympathy
@@coreblaster6809 fellow Ena fun spotted!
@Randomness67 seriously Rats are leagues above shit like this!
never once have my rats attempted to lie to me about poisoning me through my food, nor kill me and then tell my wife she's screwed because I signed for their giant rat house in 2020
i might be biased a bit though
@@cheetahcreep yeah fr tho amazing creatures
Negligence that leads to death should not be protected from their terms similar to how an NDA does not protect from a crime being committed and reported
It's not any contract that violates a person rights is always nullified in the US at least.
@@kingdomheartsfan3002 Yeah but what if it was worded really well, even the secret service director can just go 'idk lol' to every question and get off free legally while everyone knows what shes doing, cant be proven, goes free, retires, etc.
T&C doesnt absolve from breaking the law and/or wrongful death
Negligence isn't protected by a waiver.
@yourdemiseishere Well, that'd be tyrannical and we'd need the people to rise and do something. Won't happen, though. BTW, life is am inalienable Right. It can't just be litigated away.
So hypothetically a disney ride could collapse, killing everyone on board, and Disney would argue "nuh uh, they had a disney plus account"
No they would say “nuh uh, you bought the tickets”
Imagine loosing the love of your life because a company was negligent and then they refuse to pay remorse. So sad
Horrible, I wish the best for this man
that dude bout to have his villain arc
@@goofyguy3739I wouldn't even blame him
And a measley 50 thousand at that especially for a billion dollar business is disgraceful
*losing
I remember reading about a guy that scanned the contract, edited out the bs, printed it out, and signed it. The corporation also didn't read it before they signed isn't, and were 17 kinds of pissed off when he later sued them for breech of contract.
That’s what a UA-camr called Reckless Ben did to Russ from McKamey Manor lol. Russ is trying to sue him but most likely will not be able to now.
Genius
Jimmy McGil type move
They should sue disney alone just for dodging the lawsuit and for a whole lot more than 50k, Raise it to 20 Million.
Trillion
Honestly sounds like Disney should face a class action lawsuit for even adding that bullshit into their terms and services.
@@Llnstead that's assuming it's even there and they didn't just add it in stealthily just then so they can go "Nuh uh" like how your younger sibling does whenever they lose badly to you so they make up some rule on the spot trying to make your win invalid.
50k is to little I feel.. Disney should’ve just paid that up tbh, it’s gonna be way more if they can get it into courts which I think they will
not reallt how the law works lmao
Prayers to Mr. Piccolo. I hope he gets some form of justice for his late wife
Did Gohan say this?
i think another point that’s i haven’t heard anyone mention is that large parks, such as disney, do NOT allow you to bring your own food! disney is hot, lots of walking, it’s exhausting and you need to eat. it’s devastating to see people say she chose to gamble with her life when she was probably in fear of a health issue due to LACK of food.
disney can act as much as they want like they “cannot prevent cross contamination”, but whether you chose believe that or not… it should be acknowledged that the option for her to safely bring her own food was also taken away from her!
THIS!! You can’t even bring in your own drinks!!! Just a reusable water bottle!! They FORCE you to use their facilities or leave lol which is pointless if you’ve paid? The entire thing has become a risk lmao.
With one google search you can find that you CAN bring food to Disney. Just can't be in a glass container, require heating or refrigeration or have strong smell. They even have a picnic area for you to eat. Don't spread misinformation.
Right? And I’d say it sounds like discrimination if they won’t accommodate people’s food allergies but won’t let them bring their own food, it’s like saying “if you have allergies, you’re not allowed in our park.” Because honestly that’s what they’re doing
Commenting again because my comment got deleted. If you search it on google, you can easily find that you CAN bring food to the park. Let's not say things that aren't true.
Disney 100% allows you to bring your own food
This is so damaging for the reputation of Disney, a multi-billion dollar company. I hope the husband keeps up the fight and a judge dismisses that stipulation that has NOTHING to do with their case. That clause should not even be legal in a Disney Plus subscription. Clauses should only apply to what you are signing up for. Not all of their subsidiaries. I hope everyone hears this story. It's both heartbreaking and appalling. And I hope people boycott Disney and cancel their subscriptions to stand with this family. Also for their own protection to get that clause removed from Disney Plus subscriptions.
give this man a like, that husband can't give up, do it for her man, do it for her. Fuck Disney.
Edit: Also thanks for the likes, (not just to me, to @justarandombelugafan) really spreading the message
The only way I can see this continuing is if he can get funding from people online, and even that would just to be attempting to spread awareness as I doubt Disney would lose money or the court case
It's funny when the two most "family friendly" companies are the two companies most likely to spit in the face of family when it comes to their money. Disney and Nintendo, if it wasn't clear
Like charlie said, enough people will defend disney where it wont matter and people will forget about it and keep watching disney movies and going to their parks
The boycotts won't happen, we can try those other things though.
No contract should be able to sign away a human being’s rights. That is inhuman and disgusting, any contract that attempts to pry away the signer’s rights as determined by a judge should be irrevocably null and void. Being paid your due by someone who has wronged you is, by law, our rights as a citizen of this country, and a Disney contract should never be stronger than the consumer’s rights outlined by the law. And I don’t think it would hold up in court, regardless of what the Supreme Court had to say about it.
Womp womp SKILL issue
@@sanibelt_d586 you're the funniest man alive bro
They're doing a uslula
@@sanibelt_d586bot bot
Technically, avoiding what happened to her is not a right. Make in the legal sense. But even so, the law is often unjust much like in this case.
As somebody who has a deathly allergy to shrimp and shellfish, Disney has always been known as the best place for allergies. They have always been super accommodating for allergies. So for ppl saying it’s her fault she shouldn’t eat at a restaurant Disney is known for being accommodating for allergies
Theyre hiding behind their online disney+ TOU for negligence that occured in a real, physical restaurant.
This is disgusting. Shame on you, Disney.
They're shameless, soulless and heartless, the only thing their shriveled hearts crave is profits.
You gonna cancel your Disney+ now and stop giving them money? I see so many people saying Disney is evil and shame on them, yet they keep giving them their money, Charlie included
@@Lawrence_Talbot I don't use Disney+, not planning on using it anytime soon either
Okay but really they aren't. The decedent bought a ticket; tickets also have arbitration clauses. The attachment to disney plus is just padding for the executor himself, it has very little bearing on the case, its included as a catch all to predefeat any argument they try to use that says they shouldn't have to arbitrate because of other agreements... Its very very normal for every company to have arbitration clauses on their tickets...
@@Lawrence_Talbot That's the same vibe as "you're against child labour? So you going to throw away your phone?". Stupid argument.
I have severe food allergies, and have had to go the ER several times for them because of cross-contamination or other mistakes on the part of restaurants. I HAVE NEVER had to sue any restaurants, every time I had a severe reaction, the restaurant owner was extremely apologetic and willing to pay for the ER bill. Disney is genuinely evil, why wouldn’t they just pay for funeral expenses quietly and avoid all the public backlash? This hurts them more than helps them.
Is beyond just paying the damage now even if they tried apologising for what they had done they could not do much here they have shown us how much power Disney have over us a simple terms and conditions are helping them get away with this
bro it’s just nuts grow a pair
@@Dr.DisrespectFan918 u aint rage baiting nobody bro 😭😭
@@Dr.DisrespectFan918 bro you are mad funny lil bro
@@Dr.DisrespectFan918 Bait used to be believable
Disney just handed us the best reason to pirate their content on a silver platter
I see GOLD YARHARHARHARHAR
Yo ho ho what seas do ye sail?
(Websites you use to pirate movies)
it's also the biggest reason not to since they can legally kill you
@@quattuorvigintupletritrigi8357 Do you have some "time" to make some "popcorn" "online"? You know, just a little ABC, "XYZ" if you catch my meaning? Of course, you would need to make some "time" AFTER "popcorn" if you wanna catch said flix "online" at the end, but I'm sure in that order you'll find what you are looking for. Maybe.
@@No_Life_Alex fr?
“Oh, your pilot nose dived his plane killing everybody on board? Sorry you signed up for flight simulator 10 years ago 🥺”
There's something I don't get. How can you say the restaurant has no affiliation with Disney while using Disney's terms and conditions to defend for said restaurant? You can't have it both ways
I think the husband has to sue the restaurant owners. It’s fucked up but technically that’s just a business on disney owned shopping center. it’d be like suing the landlord of any other restaurant instead of the business owner
There is no penalty for piling 50 laughable arguments on top of one core decent argument. But not doing so *could* result in some technicality you didn't see coming, or bad luck & a nutty judge / jury, and then you lose the case. So you throw *everything* you can think of - including absolutely laughable trash tier nonsense. It's a complete waste of everyone's time, yes, but it's very common. People can get penalized for entirely frivolous filings, but not for adding bucket loads of frivolous crap to one halfway decent argument.
@wz9573 the penalty is looking bad to the jury.
@@Refrigerator410Actually I don't think it's fucked up to sue the restaurant. I don't know the deal that Disney has with them but in the end the staff of the restaurant not only made a massive mistake, they were warned enough that it almost seems on purpose.
@@the_bottomfraggerin what world was it on purpose?
The husband isn’t even asking for like a million dollars from them. He’s just asking for 50K! Most likely to pay for funeral arrangements or to get some other things sorted out after just losing his wife. Plus $50,000 to a 100 Billion Dollar company like Disney is less than nothing! That’s literally like pennies for them so why are they fighting so hard on this? At this point I am convinced they do this just to be cruel.
I think its to not have a mark of a death being caused by them kn their property. Which is like trying to keep ocean waters from washing away a sand castle. I hope as the generations get older, they stop caring about Disney. They treat their employees and customers like garbage.
They are fighting the lawsuit because it would ruin the already terrible name of the corporation, Disney would be a better company if their first reaction to seeing their characters wasnt a law suit, what's worse is that 50k in damages was damages on the wife(RIP) who had never agreed to anything about disney+ and 50k is practically chump change for Disney.
50k is .00005% of 100 billion they dont even wipe their ass with that money, it's too small an amount for them to even notice.
@@anitajonska8902they ruined it more bc of fighting
@@anitajonska8902Yeah you have no idea how litigation works pal, if they we’re doing this to save their reputation they’d pay him the $50K and settle before the guy ever needed to sue and no one would know about it.
I'd be careful about that Boeing talk, lots of folks suddenly spontaneously tripping down stairs into a pack of man eating clowns lately
😮oooooo hi Mr Manly the badass hero
This just in: youtuber penguinz0 passes away peacefully in his sleep,the 100 stab wounds in his back ruled to be coincidental
Reading this in your gorgeous voice.
God imagine if Charlie and Manly had a conversation, the voice clash would be like a dbz beam struggle
@@SkrinklewinkMe too I can almost hear the usual tone with slight undertone of humor in it 😭
this takes me back the the south park human centipad episode where in order to sign up for the ipad account snuck in there was you are signing your life away to this human experiment based on the human centipede... and the whole catch phrase of the episode was "well it was in the terms & conditions" "well i didnt read them" "YOU DIDNT READ THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS!!!!???"
People need to stop comparing that low quality cartoon to everything.
@@user-hn78i8so8c then they shouldnt have had an episode covering everything... lol what?
@@user-hn78i8so8cthe whole point of South Park is to parody real world events what is your beef with it 💀
@@keithmesecher3064 Except 90% of south park is just racist jokes and shock humor.
@@akiramatoi4158 Your comment makes no sense lol.
Absolutely concerning how corporations like Disney maneuver to evade responsibility. It's heartbreaking to hear about such incidents, and even more so when justice is so blatantly circumvented.
Fr they think just because they put it in the TOS it overrides the rule of law 😂. To claim they aren’t responsible for her death at their park because they have Disney+ is the most insane thing ive ever heard. I didn’t know Disneys TOS overrides government 😂
The most crazy part about this is how a court of law accepted this reasoning
Exactly! I hear this story and I want to stay focused on it but I can't help but think about every other injustice I've seen committed by companies for the sake of money, even stuff I went through myself. This guy is going to win, period, but how many people can't afford to sue places like disney or Walmart in the first place?
@@jusbertmeza4424 theyre both in bed, black is behind them both to back them up
You can't enforce terms that are unreasonable to a certain degree. The husband is allegedly unable to sue Disney because of the Disney+ free trial. Imagine if specific people on a police department were unable to investigate Disney because they had used Disney+. It would be absurd.
Edit: Charlie brings up a good point in the video. The husband had used Disney+, but the now passed (respectfully RIP) wife never agreed to any arbitration clause. Because the damages are to the wife/the husband is acting on the wife's behalf, the arbitration clause is even more unreasonable and would no way hold up in a court of law.
"You can't enforce terms that are unreasonable to a certain degree." unfortunately this is completely within law, Discord has in their ToS you can't sue them if you use their service too, same goes for Google, and UA-cam, etc
Even so it would still be unreasonable, don't quote me but I've heard of cases like roblox where is the person hasn't read it or smth or are a child where they are knowingly unlikely to read it, the contract is null and void. So even so it should not be allowed, another thing to add is gross negligence - massive bodily harm or death ignores there contracts so. They are still able to sue based on those two precedents set by previous court. Also for disney saying it's not their fault their system is very similar to mcdonalds and someone still is able to sue mcdonalds due to how they all train from mcdonalds thingy,
@@infinitehexingtondoes that matter gross negligence has been shown to make contracts void
the problem is you can drag out cases so much they can make him go bankrupt. plus its crazy that they dont need to pay the fees for the winning party...
@@AlwaysThirstys very incorrect, I've looked into most lawsuits towards Roblox myself, and their contract/ToS has never been null or void in any of their cases, most lawsuits come from parents that had been ripped off or worried about their child's safety and privacy, music artist, artist, and other companies sueing for copyright infringement
Waivers, contracts, leases, EULAs, etc. literally do not protect companies from legal repercussions for criminal negligence and law-breaking, no matter what the document says. Hope the guy gets as much as he can out of Disney, I’d be absolutely inconsolable in his position
At least that's how it's supposed to be, but for some reason the world gives big companies the power of a president.
Yeah I think he should sue the restaurant for the original amount. Then disney for adding that illegal clause
Yeah i hope he can get like 500million from them.
"YOU KILLED MY WIFE!"
"But your great grandmothers brother-in-law's son once played with a micky mouse toy in 1932 so it's kinda on you bud"
I’m a bartender. When someone says it’s an allergy I make sure I tell the manager and kitchen so the kitchen does allergy protocol and the manager observes. I’ve sadly had a lot of people fake allergies and I feel like it makes people with actual severe allergies (including me) sound like we are making a big deal out of nothing which sucks. No matter what even if the person says they have a gluten allergy and need gluten free bread while chugging down blue moons and wheat beer I make sure the kitchen follows allergy protocols.
W bartender.
i learned my lesson on this a while back. you really cant play around with allergies, ever.
Blue tool time sucks but is very necessary. I couldn’t imagine killing someone because I was too lazy to follow allergy protocols. The guilt would kill me even if their TOS protected me 😂
Exactly how it should be 👏
@@kc_jones_gamingyour allergy stuff is blue? That's funny, here in the UK blue chopping boards and knifes are for raw fish and shellfish and we use purple for allergy orders
As someone with severe nut allergies, restaurants in America have always been such a nightmare. I have fully stopped going to any because of how many bad experiences I have had. One time they put nuts on top of my food, when I asked them to remake it, they just scraped off the nuts and gave it back to me still fully contaminated. It's truly horrible how bad allergies are treated in the US
Shouldn't that count as attempted murder? 😅
@@Ravakeksis It should be, I think people just don't know how severe food allergies are. Most people assume allergies and being intolerant of something are the same I've noticed. A lot of "Oh so you just get a stomach ache?" when people ask me about my allergies
@@Rav_Oli its like someone saying: this is poison for me
And then you proceed to give them poison.
Right to jail
@@RavakeksisI didn’t realize it was that bad here I’m surprised there isn’t more legislation against that kinda stuff
God, that’s got to be scary putting your life in the hands of people who can’t be bothered to care
my friend worked for Disney and dislocated her knee while working. they wouldn't give her workers comp and fired her. they didn't compensate her pay for her appointments and her possible if needed. surgery. I found out that it was illegal to do so but they said" we are Disney. we have a lot of money you don't you can't sue us"
workers comp is required in the state of Florida so they were absolutely breaking the law here
Maybe she shouldn’t dislocate her knee next time
@@HAHAd2 maybe you shouldn't be born next time. :)
@@HAHAd2 Ha maybe. 🙄😂
@@fadedpurple7434 ah yes... the vague "my friend did X and got Y story" so... did she displocate it doing something stupid like jumping around when shes should be behind a counter selling tickets? no joke but technical stuff like this happens all the time and can be denied componsation.
you can be denied coverage if you didnt wear protective gloves / eyewear in warehouse settings.
“We can’t win Mr Piccolo, Disney has grown too powerful.” - kid Gohan probably.
Fazbear Entertainment levels of terms of service
Except you’re probably safer working at Fazbear’s pizzeria
@@TimbyTurnerlmao 😂
@TimbyTurner fr even SCP foundation and GOC would at least cover funeral cost and send some money to the family of dead employee's
disney so bad that they make Fazbear Entertainment look good, my damn.
Omg, I didn't even think of that until you pointed it out. You're right. 💀
I was hit by a firework from Disneyland that fell out of the sky. I was on Ball road, next to Disneyland when the fireworks started raining down from their nightly fireworks show. They chose to do the fireworks show on a windy day. I was hit in the back of the leg as I was running away for tree cover which sent me to the ground. The back of my leg was black for a week and it hurt to walk. I inquired about doing a lawsuit to get money from a lawyer but he told me Disney lawyers fight absolutely everything tooth and nail and it would cost me more to sue than I would be awarded so it wasn't worth my time. I complained to customer service at Disneyland and they offered to give me a free park ticket when I showed them the firework canister and my leg, but I had to sign away my right to sue them to get it. I don't know if I signed away my right to sue for anything for forever or just for the firework hitting me, but after seeing this story, I assume I signed away my right to sue about unrelated things in exchange for a disney park ticket.
They own so much stuff at so many properties now, signing away the right to sue for everything for forever would kinda suck. It's evil.
I think it's time to disband Disney.
Disney: Anti-American Corporate Overseas Proxy Terrorist.
They bought and mauled timeless stories and characters as a prelude to war. China-bought company.
yah and if you would have declined their offer, they would have tried sueing you to make you an example basically. is how companies operate. so smart move taking the ticket.
Disney: Anti-American Corporate Overseas Proxy Terrorist.
Disney: Anti-American Corporate Overseas Proxy Terrorist.
as a person with VERY severe allergies to major foods (eggs, nuts, chicken, turkey, all seafood) this makes me SOOOO MAD. like are you serious?? people calling it ‘gambling’ your life?? disney making these weird ass agreements?? they asked multiple times if it was allergen free and they said yeah. this gotta be illegal cause what. so fucked up
I’m sorry. it must feel like nothing is safe for you. I know someone with celiac’s disease (so she can’t eat gluten without getting sick) and she constantly gets crap for it - one time she was just given something with gluten in it anyway. and that’s not even a fraction of what you must deal with. people treat accommodating allergies like it’s an inconvenience when it’s literally a matter of life or death for some people. we need to be better.
@@Norcat10excuse me what the fuck is wrong with you
@@Norcat101/10 bait, needs more zest
@@Norcat10 I can sense a virgin baiter
Have you ever tried not being allergic to all of that?
I always read terms of agreement. I've been told I'm just paranoid, but I've always said it's just a matter of time until companies try to pull something shady
I'm too stupid to understand the big complicated words in contracts
This story hits really close to home for me, I'm a med school student at UT Southwestern, and my wife is DEATHLY allergic to pecans and walnuts. If I lost my wife, I'd lose myself. I hope this man can find peace in his loss, and I hope Disney is held responsible for this sickening behavior.
Reading these comments tells me there is MASSIVE work to be done in the allergy PR world. People are so ignorant and ableist. "If your allergy is so severe just live at home!", these people would rip the surgical mask off of a child cancer patient if it slightly irked them. Epi fails 1 in 10 times it's used, and, as someone with anaphylaxis risk myself knows, there is no such thing as categorically avoiding all exposure.
You might’ve already heard of it but I’d look into or ask a doctor about if immunotherapy is an option. I also have a ton of allergies but I’ve been treated so they’re not so deadly.
Bragging about being at utsw is cringe regarding a serious topic like this
I’m from Utah, my condolences being stuck there for med school.
@@amlodipine4250
Assuming that someone is bragging just because they mention something impressive is mega cringe. Stop assuming bad intent when it's not there.
He's suing on behalf of HER estate, so it's like SHE'S suing. They shouldn't be able to use something he signed against her!
What is wrong with these idiots at the restaurant??
I'll never sign up for anything again cuz i can't read all that fine print.
But there are other reasons it won't work.
Basically what Disney is implying is that you should pirate their sht because if you sign up for a Disney+ account and do the right thing, you will have no legal recourse against them if they do you terribly wrong. The pirates who get Disney stuff for free have more rights against Disney than their paying customers do, lmao
Corporations behaving like their contracts are law is why people think “well, you signed the contract.” There’s no contractual cover for criminal negligence, it’s just not how that works. Disney could have a contract that says “if you watch our shows then you agree to never sue us” which you sign in front of a dozen lawyers, and it would not matter because it doesn’t give them carte blanche to then break the law by killing people.
These companies will throw money at stuff to bully people into believing they’re unassailable. I hope this guy gets as much as he possibly can. Disney are unashamedly evil.
@@deifiedtitanthe sad thing is that disney has more money than many small nations, just look at what they did to copyright laws, I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years this kind of bullshit TOS actually became actively enforced and protected by laws
This shit is not going to fly in EU since they have rules that you can't have a 1 sided contract
Sadly this is happen in US so 80% chances that they are fucked.
I remember reading the story when it came out.
My first thought was something along the lines of "Holy shit I can't believe legal counsel had the absolute balls to try that as a strategy in open court", especially when you consider that the restaurant (Located in Disney Springs) does not even require a ticket to enter in the first place, making the ticket purchase and disney+ arbitration clauses they're trying to convince the court with an extremely hard sell if not outright moot since you can enter without a ticket or a disney+ sub, even if you somehow buy into the **CATEGORICALLY INSANE** idea that negligence leading into a wrongful death is something that should be sent to arbitration in the first place.
Oof, I think the restaurant being in a non-ticketed/open to anyone area should be a much bigger point, this is the first I'm hearing of this, and is honestly probably the best defense the husband has as to why he didn't/shouldn't have to go to arbitration
The resturaunt is actualy criminaly liable for manslaughter. You cant arbitrate out of criminal charges. This is insane and shows that the mega corps have no accountability under the law.
@@ecoonrad4753Why should it matter? If someone agrees that they will resolve any dispute with Disney via arbitration, then why would the location matter? The agreement had no such condition.
"Piccolo suing Disney for killing his wife" is one hell of a headline
Why doesn't Piccolo just destroy them with a ki blast?
mickey mouse is right next to lucifer just scheming rubbing his hands like some goofy cartoon villain rn.
🔥
You cannot beat me goofy, I have the damn powerstone! -mickey 2024
Lucifer actually learned all his tricks from Mickey himself
Ngl that actually matches the character
@@Ozone946 LOL
Random UA-camr with 2 law degrees here.
Just want to say that terms and conditions (at least in UK law) are not solid legal documents and protect companies from everything.
For example, there was a successful precedent set here in the UK where a person purchased a train ticket and on the back on the ticket was listed T&Cs in tiny writing, there was an incdient and when the individual tried to sue the train company said he couldn't because by purchasing the ticket he would be aware of the T&Cs on the ticket he was carrying.
However in law you are compared to the 'reasonable man' meaning, would a reasonable, sound of mind person read those T&Cs and assume this, and the courts found no, most people would not read the back of the ticket after purchase.
The same would apply here, this is not reasonable, and therefore this case would apply.
Again, this was a UK case, US law I am uncertain of, but just wanted to share my two cents on the matter!
I hope the husband can find some peace after this tragedy. It is all very heart breaking.
US law is much less forgiving, unfortunately
@@KenzaSheepIt would still most likely be filed under gross negligence and any ToS wouldn't apply
@@KenzaSheepwhat are you talking about. Click-wrap gets thrown out by courts in the US all the time. I graduated from law school in the US and there are plenty of similar cases to those mentioned by GOT in the UK.
From what i can tell, Corporations use TOS's as a means of deterrence more than a legitimate defense. Most people would balk at the prospect of suing a company if they see that arbitration is a required substitute.
Good insight
"you literally killed my wife"
"Buuuuut... You watched toy story in 2019 so..."
People also forget all the family wanted was 50 thousand dollars… this is POCKET CHANGE for Disney. Normally people ask for millions so I don’t get why wouldn’t they just pay it
disney doesn’t operate or own the restaurant, are you gonna sue disney if you go to one of their parks and someone attacks you, just bc it’s on their property does not automatically make them liable to something that happens
@@mariasol1545^^
yeah bro if a mcdonald’s popped up in downtown disney and their food killed a lot of people you’re saying disney should pay the lawsuits, lmfao
@@jasonb1e732 Bro why are you defending multi billion dollar corporations? Who the fuck cares if fucking disney has to pay. A person fucking died and you're over here talking about "Well the restaurant has to pay not Disney" like it's going to change ANYTHING about the fact that the "Disneyland" restaurant caused a person to die and they are trying to put off the blame instead of paying 50k for funeral costs
South park truly did warn us
2:55 I wrote the terms and services for a website once. I put a bunch of random stuff like "if we come to you in the middle of the night asking for a favor, you will nod and hand us 50,000 dollars without further question." peppered through boring parts about data collected is only for internal use blah blah blah you agree that if you ever find a Genie Lamp, you will give me two of your three wishes... Took them 2 years after I left to find it.
You get in trouble? lol
So you're telling me even THEY don't read the TOS?!
Me after lying for some youtube comment likes😈😈😈
Bro just self reported 💀
man youre lucky you didnt get caught, you could have gotten yourself and the whole company in a major shit hole. people love taking advantage of corpos and if they saw something like that they would fight tooth and nail to get whatever that disclaimer claimed. and they wouldnt be in the wrong
I Lowkey thought this was fake news when I heard about it yesterday
same
Same
its time to boycott🫡
Fr you'd think this is fake but nah☠️☠️
You wouldn't think Disney would do this?
“You killed my wife.”
Disney: “Should have read the fine print in 2019.”
Edit: because we’re gonna be technical
wife
uh wut
Bro half listened 😂
No, she did it to herself.
At this point, Disney isn't even worth pirating. And pirating is free.
Crazy how protected some people are too. My mom died because of a doctor who prescribed her migraine medication without reading the labelling. My mother had high blood pressure, and the medication label warned about serious injury or death if taken by those with high blood pressure. The doctors slowly killed her and were found innocent in court.
Sorry for your loss ☹️ I lost my dad because he was discharged from hospital with being properly checked 😢
Wow, that's truly fucking outrageous!
Legal system is fucked.
Mate was your mother blind? You say "killed her slowly" how much time did she have to read the label? not just on the doctor that one mate.
In this case, that should be taken more serious. The doctors deserve old sparky.
Because it’s called practice of medicine
5:42 As I get older, this is what I've started realizing. Corruption is as rampant as it is simply because the average person can't afford the legal fees to fight back
😂
I saw this story on Twitter a few days ago and it's absolutely infuriating. Any rational person would understand that a streaming service agreement doesn't apply to a resort restaurant.
it's all the same company, you agree'd to it's terms, that's the law in stone, I get why people can be mad over this, but at the same time do you guys really think companies are gonna sit there, and be consumed by a nation of lawsuits?
@@infinitehexington What does a streaming service agreement have to do with poisoning a tourist? She went to an allergy free restaurant and verified multiple times that her food did not contain allergens. They accidentally poisoned her and now they're using the Disney+ terms of service as a defense. What the heck?
@@infinitehexington that's not the point. it's that the terms you agree to while signing up to a trial of a streaming service and when visiting a park should be entirely distinct sets of terms
@@JadonKaiser "What the heck?" - the uneducated. It's not just a streaming agreement, it's an agreement with Disney as a whole, Disney is one entity, one company, that agreement with Disney stands for every service offered by Disney, and I believe Disney states this within their agreement.
@@kh-ro5su well that's an opinion of yours, not really a point, and by stating your opinion is a point for an argument about law, terms, and agreements is doomed from the beginning.
This is why I perfer buying physical copies of films and shows. At least they won't screw me over six ways to Sunday.
I'm a chef and accommodating allergies is NOT my favorite past time but I go above and beyond to make sure I don't fckn kill someone for wanting to enjoy a dinner out!! It's beyond me the restaurant staff let this happen much less the company covering for them. Anyone with the mentality "well, if the allergy could be lethal maybe they shouldn't eat out" is immediately not working in my kitchen and doesn't even need waste their time with that argument in the replies. He could skip the lawsuit and go for criminal charges actually.
“You didn’t read the fine print!”
-The actual, literal devil
Disney will be having Satan, Lord of Hell represent them today. Lord Satan please present your case...
@@cadet3902 thats brain dead america for you
Oh please even satan is disgusted by the lengths disney goes to protect their ass
@@Epsilon430 no he’s not
If Satan was a living person, money would be the first to both disgust and amuse him about the human mind.
Critikal is going to single-handedly take down Disney with his team of lawyers including the likes of Saul Goodman
I did not expect to find Strider here lol
Fr
And Matt Murdock
Ohhhh not all of his own. He has a "compound" 😂
oil up strider
the husbands name is Piccolo??? thats fire
It’s so astounding to me that a company worth billions can’t just accept responsibility and pay whatever cost is deemed acceptable by the court and husband. Admit your mistake, own up to it, and terminate the employments of anyone directly responsible for what happened. Honest and integrity is lost on these greedy corporate clowns
Its not their responsibility tho they don't own or operate the restaurant they rent out the space??
WE MUST PIRATE THE MOVIES AND SHOWS
@@pg9072now that is a better defense than this Disney+ TOS bs.
@@pg9072 why are they defending themselves with this contract instead of just arguing it isn’t their restaurant.
Corporations are not people, corporations as an entity do not have the capacity for emotion.
Disney is really trying to secure the "Most Evil Mega Corp" title, aren't they?
There really trying to one up Nintendo and wizards of the coast
And Activision and Blizzard.
Fazbear entertainment in FNaF less evil than this
This reminds me of the first episode of TheBoys where Hughie's girlfriend accidentally got killed by A-Train and Vought tries to give him a small compensation. Except, Disney ain't even trying to compensate at all 💀
Disney is worse than Vought
disney after telling a grieving parent they cant have spiderman on their deceased child's tombstone and suing them for a gatrillion dollars and winning
Wait they didnt only prevent the spiderman on the stone but demanded millions of dollars??? What the actual Fk?
wait wait wait they frickin won that ??? pls tell me you're kidding
@@extralook1826they’re not sadly
Disney is lex Luther
Sadly true, their legal team is evil
I feel like that is probably satire. Disney doesn't own spider man, and they probably never will since Sony owns permanent rights to spider man, where they can do whatever they want with him and Disney has to bend over backwards to even get him to appear in their media.
This is dystopian levels of evil. Poor guy didn’t ask much for compensation, and he can’t even get that.
Yes, that's the right word. Corporations own everything. Think twice before agreeing to just any "terms of service"
Can anyone of the 150 million + USA citizen with Disney+/and others sue for scam or something? No Free trial should cost your rights
Suing someone isn't a human right though.
What needs to happen is arbitration needs to be banned and court systems need to be reworked to reduce the massive load on the legal system.
Currently, 1% of all claims actually go to court, and the court system is already overloaded.
When I saw this headline pop up I unsubscribed from Disney+ and told my partner nothing Disney will ever exist within this house. It’s disgusting
When I was a child, I never thought I’d live long enough to view Disney as a villain. Now as an adult, it’s just another sad day in the world realizing that this is the norm for most if not all businesses.
disney was a villain even way before you were born lmfao
Wait til he hears about Walt Disney lol
The 2010s birthed the most cancerous toxic "Shareholders first" businesses across the world, degrading goods and services' quality for more margin. sick of this
Disney did nothing wrong lol.
@@Crazyclay78YT They did nothing wrong.
Keep in mind they spend around 50,000 daily on toilet paper at Disney world ALONE. 50k is pocket change to them.
Your wife died because of a restaurant in Disney, and their first counter argument is "you can't sue us because you made a free trial account on Disney+"
Did you seriously just comment the headline of the article
"In fact, it says right here that the Walt Disney Company isn't liable for "acts of god" and I'm pretty sure god wanted your wife dead."
Nice try bot
no... their first response was them saying that they do not own or operate the restaurant and they are just landlords who had no influence over the restaurant or their staff.
Bot Infestation.
Cancelled Disney plus as soon as this news came out. Would never visit any Disney parks
The lack of accountability here is deeply disturbing and creates a dangerous precedent. Thanks for breaking down this complex issue so effectively, your analysis has certainly opened up my eyes to the sneaky tactics these companies employ.
They did nothing wrong tho.
@@user-hn78i8so8c least obvious rage bait
@@yvette8664 How is my opinion rage bait? If it makes someone rage then that is on them not me lol.
Contracts don't protect against being sued for wrong-doing. They clearly state consequences of breach of terms. In this case, the contract was voided due to negligence, resulting in loss of life.
The disney corp can't say a party signs away their rights to sue for loss of life due to negligence. They can only prove that no negligence occurred. And since the woman involved died, negligence very obviously occurred.
but they wont pay, otherwise they may lose millions in PR (pocket change) for Disney
Time to make an AI to auto-read TOS and point out (in a simple manner) anything you may want to know before you sign off
Let me know as soon as you make it and I’ll be one of the first to buy!
@@Caliginosi7yHaha, I definitely don’t have the time rn, but if I do make anything like this it will be free.
i was just thinking of this. if someone actually pulls this off it may be a million dollar algorithm
@@Caliginosi7y Just paste the TOS into chat gpt and ask for a summary (you still have to agree to their terms tho lmao)
@@walmart3024 unless you’re a registered developer, you can’t fit 60+ pages of a TOS onto ChatGPT. If you have a slow computer, it’s unreasonable to copy and paste everything over if an algorithm (or AI) can independently view it, process, and send you what’s needed.
They're really making Disney + and their theme parks look bad
There has to be a human rights violation here
We need to start putting that phrase on the way corporations and the 1% treat us.
There is but since it's a corporation that's the perpetrator, nothing will be done to stop it.
@@SamsarasArt Not only that, a corporation isn't just one person doing the entire job by itself, there are plenty of people on the table as well. Once they start pointing fingers at eachother things'll get interesting, real interesting.
@@Just_A_Guy_Here.is there not a top guy? A ceo of Disney all together? I’m sure he gets the biggest cheque lol go for him.
Couldn't have said that better myself
The fact that he only wanted to sue for only 50k makes it even more vile. Disney is MASSIVE and worth BILLIONS on top of BILLIONS. Should be a litteral drop in the bucket for them
A literal drop of water in a lake
I still don't know how 50k would be enough or how it's estimated. It sounds terrible because right now (to me) it's sounding like her life or accidental death is worth 50k.
It feels right if the 50k is the value estimated for his healing(like therapy, or some debts, something to make his life better) is that what the 50k is for?
@@bevjoejoenot even twin, atp the whole ocean
@@escanormorph1883 it's probably her funeral expenses. Extremely grim.
@@crowgang6678 good point. Didn't think of that.
Last year I broke my knee at Disney. Before I even received any medical attention of any sort, they had the lawyers come up to me and my boyfriend and interrogated the hell out of us while I was practically screaming in pain. They even separated us to try and get answers from us individually- which made me freak out even more because I'm autistic and having my boyfriend close by was the only thing that was able to get me to even slightly calm down. I could go on and on about how horrible of an experience it was but it would take a whole essay to explain everything. But anyways, everyone was pressuring me to try and sue Disney because we didn't know if the injury would affect me long term or not. I must have had a gut feeling, because I never did attempt to sue. While I was bedridden (for about a month and a half), I heard about this Disney Springs story and was shocked. I'm glad the husband is fighting, I hope he gets the outcome that we all hope he will, even after all of this Disney+ bullshit that they're trying to pull on him.
I am so sorry about what happened to you!! I'm also neurodivergent and can't even imagine how awful the entire experience had been for you. Did your injury heal up alright?
suing disney for something like that would have just cost a ton of money & zero chance of winning.
Who TF! puts getting a lawyer over getting an ambulance!? I don’t think Disney is even run by people anymore!
@@neyphutapie well technically everyone is on the spectrum just depends on where you are on it.
I'm also Autistic and I feel so bad for this unlucky situation U got into.
If disney can't be sued, then the person who told them that their food didnt have any mentioned allergens and the cook should be charged for negligence and indirect murder
Forget any analytics or box office returns, the fact that Disney went this far to avoid paying $50k is definitive proof that they are bleeding money.
Im pretty sure punitive damages isnt often or ever to the amount a suit is filed for, its actually the jury and then the judges discretion on how much to actually award
As such whilst it could be a start of $50k, the jury could say "20 million" and then the judge could just further overule that and say "thats far too low, 400 million" or even say less than 50 grand.
Pretty sure i might be paraphrasing a legal eagle video, but regardless the ammount sued for is often just there to eye grab if its like...1 billion
@@DaCaLsTa7777I heard the same thing on a legal commentary channel. Something about it being a lawsuit for a minimum of 50k otherwise it would have to go to small claims court.
Nah, they're just a megacorp. Those would rather spend 1 million dollars in legal fees than pay out a 50k settlement. They do it on principal.
Nah, they are just like any ordinary corporation. They won't empty out their pockets to the people they get their money from, only to themselves for other corporations or projects they are working on.
Johnny Silverhand was warning us about shit like this
irl is cyberpunk 2077 without any of the cool stuff
Fr
*hears the rebel path playing as I walk into Disney castle's front door*
@@greenherooftheinterwebz7078 💀fr
Instead of V going to save their life they just go to Disney world xd
I have a dairy allergy just like her, and I have always had to be super conscious of eating out at places where I don't know how the food is prepared or what's in it, so getting the very rare "we'll accommodate your allergies" to completely ignoring them is such a slap in the face of trust to the consumer, it's terrifying and Disney needs to be held accountable for this.
as someone who spent a number of years in restaurants, a scenario you can promise a product not only doesn't contain, but has not been even remotely contaminated by an allergen, is extremely unrealistic.
I'm genuinely curious if this restaurant is ignoring straight up health codes, judging from an already gaping lack of health concern.
The amount of times I’m expected to just not eat because of my food allergies is crazy. It’s hard to enjoy yourself when your stomach is grumbling and you’re lightheaded and dizzy.
disney is not at fault... it was not a disney restaurant, it was a 3rd party that rents land from disney. they have no control or influence over the restaurant or their staff, they should be suing the restaurant as they are the only people who are truly responsible for this colossal fuckup. you dont sue the land owners when a mcdonalds sells you something you are allergic to, you sue the mcdonalds.
I’m a bartender and I always make sure it’s taken seriously. I feel like the rise of people saying they have an allergy but don’t because they don’t want to eat a certain thing or don’t like it has made people take allergies less seriously and that sucks for people like us with allergies. I have a severe bee allergy and when I get panicked around bees some of my friends and coworkers roll their eyes and it’s like Karen I will literally die if I’m stung.
@@Honeybeerose88 Nah this isn't an issue. If someone says they have an allergy it does not really matter if they do or not, because you should be prepared to accommodate the request anyway. Why is it any of your business if someone will die from peanut exposure or is simply picky?
edit: of course "you" is not referring to you personally, I mean the people who say that
I talked to someone who used to work at Disney land and he said if someone is having health issues or gets injured, the security will remove you from the property so they technically can’t be sued since they were no longer on the property if someone was unfortunate enough to pass away or have an injury become worse.
My last apartment rental contract was 40 pages long, front and back, single spaced. They deliberately try to make contracts too long to read.
As someone with food allergies, the website for the restaurant in question is upsetting. You click the menu and there’s an immediate disclaimer about gluten/other food allergies is just.. so rude? Especially given that the steps they mention to do if you have food allergies are exactly what this woman did.
Genuinely this is why I’m so worried about eating out
Fun fact.. use the way back machine and those were just added recently smh
Learned this from South Park
Inspector Butters is on the case
"Dammit why won't it read??!!" - Steve Jobs
Arbitration clauses really should just be illegal at this point all it is used for is really unethical behavior and skirting the law