this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
1545 points (98.3% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

9539 readers
405 users here now

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

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

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

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

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

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] orcrist@lemm.ee 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's particularly entertaining because he's dead, so whatever agreement he made doesn't stop her from filing a suit. In other words, this is not a situation where someone who's currently alive had agreed to something in a click-through many years ago and is now suing.

One of the other interesting points of contract law that I think Disney will quickly lose is the fact that the agreement years ago was between two parties for something that happened years ago. They will have difficulty successfully arguing that what looked like a small scale deal that has long since ended actually had potential negative ramifications but only for one party, for the rest of their lives. If Disney were still giving him benefits up to his death, I think that could potentially be a different situation.

And as usual, depending on the level of negligence on Disney's end, it doesn't matter what he agreed to.

[โ€“] tektite@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 month ago

In other words, this is not a situation where someone who's currently alive had agreed to something in a click-through many years ago and is now suing.

The wife was the doctor who died. The husband is who is suing and also who signed up for the D+ trial so yes it is but on behalf of someone who cannot sue as she is dead.