Last year there was a Disney death, Jeffrey Piccolo and his wife Kanokporn Tangsuan had dinner at Raglan Road Irish Pub, part of the Walt Disney World resort in Florida. Ms.Kanokporn Tangsuan was severely allergic to dairy and nuts; and made the servers aware of her allergies. They reassured her everything was fine, even when her order came without the typical flags to indicate that it was clear of allergens. A few hours later, she went into a fatal anaphylactic shock and the autopsy confirmed it was due to elevated levels of dairy and nuts in her body.
Mr. Piccolo is suing Disney for wrongful death. Disney has made a few counterarguments, but one of their claims is that because he had signed up for a Disney Plus trial subscription in 2019, he has agreed to the terms and conditions of the contract which says that any dispute with the company must be settled through arbitration rather than trial courts.
It’s a bit against the spirit of “Who writes this shit?” in that the articles by commentators on this seem to be fine. The main problem is the asinine legal argument made by Disney’s lawyers. Although, those were obviously written so it counts for this column.
One point in discussions about this is that Disney is known for hardball tactics in legal proceedings, and this is an example. Disney deaths do occur on property and in typical Disney fashion they try to wipe it away as quick as possible. But in addition to being evil, this is stupid.
Disney Death and Repercussions
Disney death’s just aren’t good for Disney’s brand. It is an obvious question for interviews with anyone on Disney + to ask them what they think about this. Someone can be on to promote a Marvel show, and a journalist like Norah O’Donnell can ask “Are you concerned that if one of your fans gets a subscription to Disney + because they like your performance, and later a spouse or a child dies due to a Disney employee’s negligence, the case could go to arbitration as a result of the terms and conditions?”
Many reporters would hesitate to ask such an incendiary question about an organization as powerful as Disney. They may be afraid of lawsuits. They may be afraid that this will mean that ABC News will never consider hiring them; and that Disney might retaliate against future employers. But there are some journalists with integrity and nothing to lose who may ask that question.
I could certainly see John Stewart or Bill Maher going that way. And it can come up in other ways, like Reddit’s Ask Me Anything (I’d be curious about the extent to which that is upvoted) or Q&As at comic convention panels. A woman in a Baby Yoda shirt can say in Hall H “Big fan of the Acolyte, but I’m worried about recommending this to friends because of the terms and conditions. If my kid dies due to a roller coaster malfunction at Disneyland, I’m shit out of luck, but do you think it’s worth it for my coworkers who haven’t yet signed up to Disney Plus to take that risk?”
I wonder if it’s something for rivals to point out. Can Six Flags and Warner Brothers say that buying a subscription to HBO Max won’t be used to punish anyone if Six Flags screws up? Granted, there are obvious reasons not to go with this in marketing, since it may discourage people from purchasing streaming subscriptions or amusement park tickets. HBO execs probably don’t want Max subscribers thinking about what rights they might be signing away, nor does Six Flags want people considering the possibility the food (or the rides) will kill them.
It’s quite clear that when it’s in Disney’s interests, they’ll claim that Disney+ is separate from the amusement parks. Hell, this is what a spokesperson said.
“We are deeply saddened by the family’s loss and understand their grief,” a Disney spokesperson said Wednesday. “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.”
So, a restaurant on a Disney resort is not connected to Disney Parks and Resorts. But if you watched Disney Plus, any lawsuit involving negligence in amusement parts will have to go straight to arbitration, which favors big corporations because they build relationships with arbiters.
Who writes this shit in a legal claim?
In the interests of full disclosure, I’ll note I’ve met Jeff and Kanokporn tangsuan a few times. We were part of a group that went on big annual camping adventures in Upstate New York. I haven’t talked to Jeff about this because it would feel intrusive, and I don’t want any chance of anybody using what I write here against Jeff in a legal case against this tragic Disney death. I’d be outraged even if I didn’t think the deceased and her widower were good people.
Update: I wanted to share a point I heard about the story. “(Disney) broke the cardinal rule of do no fucking harm to the corporation. As audiences are becoming skeptical of so many streaming options, they probably don’t want to deal with this shit. It’s the kind of story that resonates heavily in middle America.”
Disney has gotten some credit for dropping the argument, but that’s not quite what happened.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cr7r9djxj0do
A representative for Disney said that they’re waiving their right to arbitration. So as far as they’re concerned, they can still force you to go into arbitration if you ever signed up for Disney+. They’re just not pushing it in this case.
Do you agree Disney’s argument is absurd here? How do you feel owning Disney+ knowing that if a tragic event such as a Disney death were to occur they could pull this? Let us know below in the comments. Also, check out our other installment in Who Writes this S*!& here.
