Except that tweets aren't sent to Disney. They're sent to all Twitter users.

For some reason I don't see a reply link on lewisgodowski's comment.

> Couldn't replying to their tweet be considered sending it to Disney?

Disney apparently does "consider" that to be sending it to Disney. Since Twitter doesn't belong to Disney, I don't see how that could have any legal relevance. Twitter has its own terms of service.

(I am not a lawyer.)

If you and I tweet back and forth agreeing that I'll sell you a sandwich for $5, that's a contract. No court is going to hear an argument that I was talking to Twitter and then Twitter was talking to you so it doesn't count. Anyone tweeting @Disney is clearly "sending it to Disney".

Also I think there's a time delay on seeing the reply link on replies to your own comments.

Even ignoring the rest of your logic - replies are different from mentions and can be inferred only by context of the tweet and not simply the presence of @disney in the tweet.

In your example, I would be Tweeting you explicitly saying “I’ll give you $5.” Maybe that’s a binding contract.

That’s not what Disney is doing. What Disney is doing would be like if I said “Anyone who Tweets at me owes me $5.” That’s obviously not a binding contract.

Disney is saying "in exchange for a chance to spread your message in our marketing materials, you agree to our follow our ToS".

You're really twisting words here. No that is not what is happening. I never agreed to any exchange. I should be able to tweet at Disney with that hashtag and not agree to their ToS. Nothing about a hashtag implies consent. It is not their service to set terms for. I already agreed to the twitter ToS. I shouldn't have to be worried about accidentally agreeing to terms just because I used the right combination of hashtag and twitter user.

> The above legal language applies ONLY to replies to this tweet using #MayThe4th and mentioning @DisneyPlus

Couldn't replying to their tweet be considered sending it to Disney?

> > The above legal language applies ONLY to replies to this tweet using #MayThe4th and mentioning @DisneyPlus

> Couldn't replying to their tweet be considered sending it to Disney?

Is replying to a column in an opinion piece sending it to the author or the newspaper?

Tweeting is (generally speaking) a public performance, not something which is "sent" to someone. The same applies to most open platforms, including Hacker News comments like this one.

Except the phrase "Ok to print" is unambiguous consent. And should it occur somewhere where it is ambiguous what is being meant then it doesn't count as consent.

Sending a tweet to Disney with a generic hashtag can't be considered consent in any way, shape or form. What guarantee does DisneyPlus have that everyone sending them a tweet with hashtag #MayThe4th is intending that to count as consent?

Yeah, that's what it reads like for sure.

Shouldn't they be negotiating with Twitter for that though?