5 ms·

The steady creep of corporate lawfare is probably a given, globally. But this "signing away" your rights to settle disputes in a courtroom by accepting a mere

The steady creep of corporate lawfare is probably a given, globally. But this "signing away" your rights to settle disputes in a courtroom by accepting a mere eula - it seems so bonkers. Is that solely a US thing?! Does it happen in Europe?

glitchc 2y ago
The problem is that Disney is a company that produces media, and consuming media is not a human right. Should entertainment be a human right? I don't think so, and I'm confident most legal professionals don't either.
- lotsofpulp 2y ago
  Disney does far more than just produce media. It houses guests, puts them on their rides, and feeds them food, etc. However, in this specific case, Disney does not even seem to be involved, and they are trying to use the Disney+ terms to get out of being in the lawsuit: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/disney-says-man-cant-sue-wifes-death-agreed-disney-terms-service-rcna166594 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/disney-says-man-cant-su... > A spokesperson for Disney told NBC News: “We are deeply saddened by the family’s loss and understand their grief. Given that this restaurant is neither owned nor operated by Disney, we are merely defending ourselves against the plaintiff’s attorney’s attempt to include us in their lawsuit against the restaurant.”
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- repelsteeltje 2y ago
  Not untrue. But wasn't the problem here that - yes, Disney is a media company, but they also run an amusement park which serves food. Not sure if food safety is a human right, but access to food is probably mentioned somewhere, no?!
  - Ekaros 2y ago
    >Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. Well food that does not kill you seem to me qualify under adequate for health and well-being.
- randomdata 2y ago
  > Should entertainment be a human right? The question is of copying, not entertainment. Which is an interesting topic with respect to human rights as it has not been settled whether or not mastery over it is a human right. What is generally accepted by most legal professionals, though, is that it is in conflict with human rights if not a human right itself. Which is why some believe that it is, in fact, a human right.
lokimedes 2y ago
At least in Denmark, we have consumer rights that protect against a company making legal contracts with individual persons, that place the person in a worse situation than the law.
Msurrow 2y ago
Generally, nope. IANAL but fundamentally there are personal rights you just cannot sign away. E.g. even if you sign an employment contract saying explicitly that you have zero vacation (just an example), it just won’t be valid. Another big difference in general is that you cannot just be suing people for whatever reason like in the states. A more relevant example for this is GDPR: nothing written in an eula can “release” the company from basic GDPR rights and principles.
sebazzz 2y ago
In EU you have regulation 93/13/EEG that limits the possibilities of forced arbitration. Power to the consumer. It is codified into the law of every member state, but might differ on some implementation details. For instance, in the Netherlands forced arbitration can only exists if it fair and not burdensome, and disputes can still be taken to state court. Also these clauses cannot be applied for totally different disputes (like restaurant vs streaming service like in this case).

glitchc 2y ago

The problem is that Disney is a company that produces media, and consuming media is not a human right. Should entertainment be a human right? I don't think so, and I'm confident most legal professionals don't either.

lotsofpulp 2y ago
Disney does far more than just produce media. It houses guests, puts them on their rides, and feeds them food, etc. However, in this specific case, Disney does not even seem to be involved, and they are trying to use the Disney+ terms to get out of being in the lawsuit: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/disney-says-man-cant-sue-wifes-death-agreed-disney-terms-service-rcna166594 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/disney-says-man-cant-su... > A spokesperson for Disney told NBC News: “We are deeply saddened by the family’s loss and understand their grief. Given that this restaurant is neither owned nor operated by Disney, we are merely defending ourselves against the plaintiff’s attorney’s attempt to include us in their lawsuit against the restaurant.”
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
repelsteeltje 2y ago
Not untrue. But wasn't the problem here that - yes, Disney is a media company, but they also run an amusement park which serves food. Not sure if food safety is a human right, but access to food is probably mentioned somewhere, no?!
- Ekaros 2y ago
  >Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. Well food that does not kill you seem to me qualify under adequate for health and well-being.
randomdata 2y ago
> Should entertainment be a human right? The question is of copying, not entertainment. Which is an interesting topic with respect to human rights as it has not been settled whether or not mastery over it is a human right. What is generally accepted by most legal professionals, though, is that it is in conflict with human rights if not a human right itself. Which is why some believe that it is, in fact, a human right.

lokimedes 2y ago

At least in Denmark, we have consumer rights that protect against a company making legal contracts with individual persons, that place the person in a worse situation than the law.

Msurrow 2y ago

Generally, nope. IANAL but fundamentally there are personal rights you just cannot sign away. E.g. even if you sign an employment contract saying explicitly that you have zero vacation (just an example), it just won’t be valid. Another big difference in general is that you cannot just be suing people for whatever reason like in the states. A more relevant example for this is GDPR: nothing written in an eula can “release” the company from basic GDPR rights and principles.

sebazzz 2y ago

In EU you have regulation 93/13/EEG that limits the possibilities of forced arbitration. Power to the consumer. It is codified into the law of every member state, but might differ on some implementation details. For instance, in the Netherlands forced arbitration can only exists if it fair and not burdensome, and disputes can still be taken to state court. Also these clauses cannot be applied for totally different disputes (like restaurant vs streaming service like in this case).