Please note that all submissions to the site are subject to the wiki's licence, CC 4.0 BY-SA, as found here

Disney: Difference between revisions

From Consumer Action Taskforce
Jump to navigationJump to search
DFP (talk | contribs)
m Added the page to the 'Companies' category
No edit summary
 
(7 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{StubNotice}}
----
The Walt Disney Company, founded in 1923 by Walt Disney and Roy O. Disney, is one of the most recognizable entertainment companies globally. Known for its movies, theme parks, and television networks, Disney has become a dominant player in the entertainment industry. In 2019, Disney launched the Disney+ streaming service, which makes most of their content library available to viewers as a monthly subscription.
The Walt Disney Company, founded in 1923 by Walt Disney and Roy O. Disney, is one of the most recognizable entertainment companies globally. Known for its movies, theme parks, and television networks, Disney has become a dominant player in the entertainment industry. In 2019, Disney launched the Disney+ streaming service, which makes most of their content library available to viewers as a monthly subscription.


=== The EPCOT Death Lawsuit and Disney's Arbitration Clause ===
== Controversies <!-- Potential place to find other consumer rights failures of Disney https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Walt_Disney_Company --> ==
In a wrongful death lawsuit, Jeffrey Piccolo sued Walt Disney Parks and Resorts after his wife died from a severe allergic reaction at a restaurant in Disney's EPCOT theme park. The lawsuit claims Disney’s negligence in managing food allergens contributed to her death.<ref>https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/14/business/disney-plus-wrongful-death-lawsuit/index.html</ref> However, Disney attempted to have the case dismissed and sent to [[Forced Arbitration|arbitration]], citing the Disney+ user agreement signed by Piccolo in 2019 when he subscribed for a one-month free trial. This agreement includes a clause requiring arbitration for disputes with the company.


Disney argued that, because Piccolo had subscribed to Disney+ (even for a free trial), he was bound by the arbitration clause for any legal claims against the company, regardless of whether the issue was related to Disney+. This sparked significant backlash, particularly as over 150 million Disney+ subscribers could similarly be barred from suing Disney over serious issues like wrongful death due to such arbitration clauses. In response to the criticism, Disney ultimately withdrew its motion and allowed the case to continue in court.<ref>https://www.npr.org/2024/08/14/nx-s1-5074830/disney-wrongful-death-lawsuit-disney</ref>
=== Forced Arbitration of a Wrongful Death Lawsuit ===
In October 2023, Kanokporn Tangsuan, dining at the Raglan Road Irish Pub in Disney Springs died as a result of an allergic reaction<ref>https://www.foxandfarleylaw.com/woman-dies-from-eating-at-disney-amusement-park-pub-despite-amusement-park-wait-staff-assurances-of-allergen-free-food-disney-attempts-to-bar-wrongful-death-lawsuit-due-to-disney-s/</ref>, despite multiple requests that her food be cooked in an allergen-free manner. When her husband attempted to sue the restaurant for causing her death, Disney utilized terms from a trial subscription to Disney+ to attempt to force the husband into arbitration<ref>https://apnews.com/article/disney-allergy-death-lawsuit-nyu-doctor-florida-8a6256b58311a01226d167fa80d37aad</ref>. When people were informed of this, the substantial public outcry prompted Disney to rescind their request for the husband to enter arbitration.<ref>https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2024-08-20/disney-reverses-course-on-wrongful-death-lawsuit-agrees-let-case-proceed-court</ref> The case is ongoing.


== References ==
<references />
[[Category:Companies]]
[[Category:Companies]]

Latest revision as of 23:15, 15 January 2025

Article Status Notice: This Article is a stub

Notice: This Article Requires Expansion[edit source]

This article is underdeveloped, and needs additional work to meet the wiki's Content Guidelines and be in line with our Mission Statement for comprehensive coverage of consumer protection issues. Issues may include:

  • This article needs to be expanded to provide meaningful information
  • This article requires additional verifiable evidence to demonstrate systemic impact
  • More documentation is needed to establish how this reflects broader consumer protection concerns
  • The connection between individual incidents and company-wide practices needs to be better established
  • The article is simply too short, and lacks sufficient content

How You Can Help:

  • Add documented examples with verifiable sources
  • Provide evidence of similar incidents affecting other consumers
  • Include relevant company policies or communications that demonstrate systemic practices
  • Link to credible reporting that covers these issues
  • Flesh out the article with relevant information

This notice will be removed once the article is sufficiently developed. Once you believe the article is ready to have its notice removed, visit the discord and post to the #appeals channel, or mention its status on the article's talk page.


The Walt Disney Company, founded in 1923 by Walt Disney and Roy O. Disney, is one of the most recognizable entertainment companies globally. Known for its movies, theme parks, and television networks, Disney has become a dominant player in the entertainment industry. In 2019, Disney launched the Disney+ streaming service, which makes most of their content library available to viewers as a monthly subscription.

Controversies[edit | edit source]

Forced Arbitration of a Wrongful Death Lawsuit[edit | edit source]

In October 2023, Kanokporn Tangsuan, dining at the Raglan Road Irish Pub in Disney Springs died as a result of an allergic reaction[1], despite multiple requests that her food be cooked in an allergen-free manner. When her husband attempted to sue the restaurant for causing her death, Disney utilized terms from a trial subscription to Disney+ to attempt to force the husband into arbitration[2]. When people were informed of this, the substantial public outcry prompted Disney to rescind their request for the husband to enter arbitration.[3] The case is ongoing.

References[edit | edit source]