• Ebby
    link
    fedilink
    1461 month ago

    "As such, we’ve decided to waive our right to arbitration and have the matter proceed in court.”

    Notice they still claim arbitration is their right, that the streaming agreement is still valid, but would rather appease the masses to mitigate bad publicity.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      901 month ago

      They also don’t want to test the legality of forced arbitration on something like this, where precedent against it might be set.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        301 month ago

        Especially when the judge will have seen the outrage and likely be influenced by it.

        I think you’re very right.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        830 days ago

        That was my first thought… They initiated it for the precedent, they must have had reason to believe they wouldn’t get the ruling they wanted.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          1930 days ago

          The right case where there isn’t popular support for the plaintiff.

          Bonus points if the case has more of a grey area such as the plaintiff agreed to the TOS while doing something similar with another business unit and closer in time to when the incident occurs.

          I.E they sign the TOS for a Disney cruise and the incident happens a week later at the park.

          • Rentlar
            link
            fedilink
            130 days ago

            Courts should keep a tally record of bogus defences and charges that a plaintiff or defendant brings for each client…