this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
71 points (96.1% liked)

Television

4534 readers
197 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] distantsounds@lemmy.world 60 points 2 weeks ago

To think that Disney could have gotten away with it if this guy had a Disney+ account.

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 52 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That's like a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a penny to them.

[–] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

the agencies involved here are not able to fine much more than that. But I guess a fair question is why are they only fining for this stuff after the fact? Do they not inspect periodically?

Also the widow is suing Disney for wrongful death, so hopefully that will hit them a little harder.

[–] can@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 weeks ago

Hope they never had a Disney+ trial...

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 weeks ago

I don't doubt there's some limit to the fine, I'm more trying to point out the absurdity of how low that is for Disney. Surely we could concoct a system where the fine is based on some percentage rather than a flat rate that is probably decades out of sync with inflation.

[–] snausagesinablanket@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago

That'll teach em.

[–] L0rdMathias@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Why did they get fined? Surly the one that fell had a D+ subscription at some point ever, maybe even in the future.

[–] yggstyle@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

Notice fined... not sued. Im certain that clause was in every single contract that worker signed...

[–] Got_Bent@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago

So they're losing like, what, five Disney World one-day admissions?