Mastodawn

Scott, present & accounted for Mar 30, 2023

@mekkaokereke I love to see it.

MarcusCSC Mar 30, 2023

@mekkaokereke one of the funnier and concerning things about large business is the resources they throw at legal challenges to their business. Disney had this ace up their sleeve. Kudos to them, but a warning to the many that trickery is to here to be waged against anyone in their way.

Queen of Anxiety Mar 30, 2023

@mcole @mekkaokereke Yep. It's nice to see anybody stick it to DeSatan, but I still don't like that they ever had this agreement, let alone that it will live on because now it makes lefties feel good that ... greed won over hate? Or something. Disney's been waging dirty war for decades, and they're not the only corporation that does it, and I don't like that. Usually it's people who can't afford to stand up to them that suffer, not GOP meatballs.

Sean Mar 30, 2023

@queenofnewyork @mcole @mekkaokereke I’ll take Disney over meatball Ron any day of the week.

MarcusCSC Mar 30, 2023

@Craktok @queenofnewyork @mekkaokereke so will Walt

@mekkaokereke Oh my god. That is a thing of beauty.

"If the perpetual term of this Declaration is deemed to violate the 'Rule Against Perpetuities,' or any similar law or rule, this Declaration shall continue in effect until twenty one (21) years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England living as of the date of this Declaration." 🤣

James Widman Mar 30, 2023

@siderea @mekkaokereke

"[...] King Charles III [...]"

*what*.

@JamesWidman

The article points out that Lilibet of Suffolk was born in 2021.

Jake Miller Mar 30, 2023

@siderea @mekkaokereke @JamesWidman I, for one, am relieved that the Sussex family will no longer need to fund their security arrangements on their own!

@siderea @mekkaokereke
Agreed, hilariously not in perpetuity but nearly as close to. Something that will be maintained by the United Kingdom government, 🇬🇧 will be public knowledge, indisputable and also +21 years.

👏🏻 👏🏻 👏🏻

@taatm

I wonder if the form of the condition - someone's life plus N years - is a subtle allusion to the "Mickey Mouse Protection Act" (actually the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998), which extended copyright in the US to life of the creator plus 75 years. As if Disney's lawyers were saying, "Remember us? We're the folks who *bought ourselves a federal law*."

@siderea @mekkaokereke

It might well be for specifically 21 years but I would have thought it’s more to do with risk management. The first condition could technically be over very quickly as it refers to “King Charles”. It is technically possible for the UK Parliament to vote to switch to a Republic which would introduce doubt to the clause.

This is unlikely for many reasons, including a UK legal detente where Royalists believe Parliament is delegated power from the crown 👑 while Parliamentarians hold that the crown 👑 is the recognised head of state by Parliament, so such a thing could cause a UK constitutional crisis, as our constitution isn’t written down.

The super clever bit is that the crown 👑 (short for kingship) is extra legal to the US and untouchable by US politicians but is also has recognised status in the Magna Carter, a foundation stone of US law. That status is “f*ck off king!” But you need to be recognised to be told to “f#ck off”. So to tackle that bit by US law, the law would fist have to disassembled itself.

The King was no doubt chosen because he can act as a private individual while also having status enshrined in law around the US constitution.

If this all happens, they’ve still got 21 years, which is ‘reasonable’, also a legal concept.

They might not have been the first to do this, but it’s ducking brilliant! 🦆

@taatm

> The first condition could technically be over very quickly as it refers to “King Charles”

Incorrect. It refers to the *descendents* of King Charles alive at the time of the contract going into effect. He could kick off tomorrow and it wouldn't change anything in the slightest.

@siderea @mekkaokereke
I’m not talking about death. I’m talking about the UK becoming a Republic and there being no “King Charles”, only “Charles”. Your point holds on the descendants, just that as a point of fact this is challengeable.

Ironically, if he dies this clause becomes stronger as there is no title inferred on the decedents.

@taatm
Just to pick a nit: The idea that the Magna Carta is fundamental to US law is more of a SovCit talking point than an actual fact. It was certainly one of many documents with which the architects of independence & the Constitution were familiar, but when you get down to it it's basically a power-sharing agreement amongst noble peers at a time when the King of England amounted to a glorified paramount chieftain.
@siderea @mekkaokereke

@FeralRobots @siderea @mekkaokereke

I actually agree with you about the actual US constitution, you are right, I was taking a shortcut. It is however foundational to modern US law.

All I am saying is for some reason the US legal elite got very tired of visiting a muddy field in England where it was signed and fairly recently built a very American monument there with their own money.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta
See Modern Legacy

Magna Carta - Wikipedia

@taatm
Not on topic but I followed a link on that site & noticed this weird little spam injection - looks like someone has managed to compromise their site & inject ad links (I'm just gonna presume there's malware & not check it out) INTO THEIR SITE COPY.

Which, like...I've been in this biz a while so I know it happens but it's kinda wild seeing it on this kind of a site just...hangin' out there.

@siderea @mekkaokereke

@FeralRobots @siderea @mekkaokereke
Thanks very much. I’ll edit and kill the link.

Ta v much.

@taatm
Annoying because it was a nice link! & as my wife would say about the spammers, "why are so many people such assh*les?"
@siderea @mekkaokereke

Jennifer Kayla | Theogrin 🦊Mar 31, 2023

@siderea @taatm @mekkaokereke

It'd be actually hilarious (in a very grim and unpleasant fashion) if Disney were the ones to come up with it due to that, but the use of a Royal Lives Clause to circumvent perpetuity restrictions has been around for well over 400 years, according to Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_lives_clause

Royal lives clause - Wikipedia

The Animal and the Machine Mar 31, 2023

@theogrin @siderea @mekkaokereke
Cool. I thought it might have been a standard legal tool.

I find it fascinating how a British monarch is used in US law though. With contract law being the lowest form of law, it shows how difficult it is to write perpetuity legislation.

Jennifer Kayla | Theogrin 🦊Mar 31, 2023

@taatm @siderea @mekkaokereke

The Rockefellers have been used in the past, so it's certainly not just the royal family which gets used for this sort of thing. You could probably source any public figure with a bunch of kids and a high life expectancy, and the Royal Family have long had the entire medical apparatus of the British Isles waiting on them hand and foot.

Though with Charles III's belief in homeopathy, that's maybe not as sure a bet as it used to be.

Kelly McCubbin Mar 30, 2023

@mekkaokereke
Boom goes the dynamite.

Dan McDonald Mar 30, 2023

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TF4_4g1B2Ug

Here's Mickey dealing with employees:

Mickey Mouse beats up Joe Jonas

YouTube

Amanda Carson Mar 30, 2023

@mekkaokereke I have my issues with Disney, but honestly I think I'm experiencing a schadenfreude overdose right now and I am totally here to watch Disney continue to publicly humiliate Desantis and his fans.

Mark Saltveit Mar 30, 2023

@mekkaokereke
Furthermore, I'll bet Disney's shareholders are a lot more willing to foot huge legal bills to protect their biggest asset, than Florida taxpayers are willing to stake DeSantis for fighting a mouse.

Even tthe conservative Floridians I know love Disney. What a stupid fight to pick.

BoredomFestival Mar 30, 2023

@mekkaokereke "They send one of yours to the hospital, you send one of theirs to the morgue. That's the Reedy Creek way!"

Sean Mar 30, 2023

@BoredomFestival @mekkaokereke 👏🏾👏🏾

skua Mar 30, 2023

#VomitFace * De Santis is probably not so stupid as to consider taking out the descendants of Charles III.

* From an incident after a Gitmo detainee had been tortured by having an excess of fluid poured into their stomach.

@mekkaokereke
DeSantis has institutional tools of intimidation that are very effective against individuals & even against orgs - & sometimes suprisingly large orgs. What he doesn't grok here is that:
1. Not only is Disney bigger than Ron DeSantis, it may actually be bigger than FLORIDA.
2. Disney KNOWS* THIS ABOUT ITSELF.
_
*or at least believes it.

Vrimj Mar 30, 2023

The beautiful thing here is that you can't really change the law that supports these agreements without impacting sugar and orange growers too so like it or not Disney has back up from some of the biggest conservative legal interests in Florida.

Jamie Booth Mar 30, 2023

@mekkaokereke it's like trying to pick a fight with IBM in the 1970's. Once you get annoying enough, they send their lawyers to grind you into a fine paste.