• dormedas@lemmy.dormedas.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    113
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    This isn’t so much an argument for piracy as it is an argument to not patronize Disney. Especially considering that Disney’s motion for arbitration is so far beyond baseless that it’s baffling they’d even attempt it.

    AKA: No, Disney will not be able to force you to arbitrate a dispute just because you once (or still do) subscribed to Disney+. Their motion will be denied, and pirating their content will not - in any way - afford you legal protections in the future.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      3 months ago

      Their motion will be denied, and pirating their content will not - in any way - afford you legal protections in the future.

      We don’t know that yet. I want that to be true. I hope it’s true. But it isn’t true yet.

    • hate2bme@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      It is an argument for piracy. Want to watch a Disney show but don’t want to give Disney money in any way? Piracy

      • acargitz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        A Disney movie? Believe it or not, piracy.

        (Sorry, had to)

      • dormedas@lemmy.dormedas.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        That was the argument before this case, and in the virtually certain case the judge denies Disney’s motion, there is no additional argument besides “Disney is even more petty and scummy than we all thought.”

      • stephen01king@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        The actual solution in that case is just don’t watch a Disney show. You won’t die from not watching shows.

    • minibyte@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      pirating their content will not - in any way - afford you legal protections in the future

      Premium subscription - 13.99 a month. 13.99 a month invested getting 12.4% apr a year, reinvested will net you $40k in 30 years. I’m sure you could afford some legal protections with that.

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      until the supreme court gets to hear a case like this. can’t wait for another 6-3.

    • blandfordforever@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Pirating their content doesn’t afford you legal protections but agreeing to their license agreements could definitely turn out to have been a big mistake.

      If you’re just itching for that content, pick your poison.