A Law suit against ISTC....

[X2CommNavISTC]

Well, Ive heard of this before when it was first brought into light and I, well I think its a load of crap. I dont really care about it, but someone might:

ETC Sets The Record Straight On Mission:Space
October 14, 2003


Southampton, PA: October 14, 2003-Environmental Tectonics Corporation (AMEX:ETC) announced today that they want to put the record straight on how the Mission:Space ride at EPCOT was created. In view of ongoing litigation, ETC had intended to remain silent in the press but recent public statements are, in the opinion of the Company, damaging to ETC's reputation and could stifle ETC's future business prospects in the entertainment industry. According to William F. Mitchell, ETC's President, "We can no longer remain silent. ETC is the creator of the Mission:Space ride concept and we manufactured the ride; we provided the technology. Under our contract, ETC licensed its technology for a one-time use at EPCOT Center. Also, ETC's contract requires that future Mission:Space type rides be purchased from ETC."

The story of Mission:Space is not ETC's creation. ETC, however determined how the story could be turned into a physical ride. ETC provided the concept, then built a prototype and demonstrated how the story could be told on an ETC Centrifuge motion platform.

Recent news releases indicate that NASA engineers had substantial involvement in the creation of the Mission:Space ride; strongly implying the ride technology was NASA's. ETC states that NASA had nothing to do with the ride technology. "Two NASA astronauts visited ETC for one day during the ride development." The ride concept was entirely ETC's and the core technology was all based on ETC's existing motion base technology. The technologies in the Mission:Space ride are used in ETC's GYROLAB, GYRO-IPT, GLAB, GFET, GFET2 and Tactical Flight Trainers products. The ride concept is also the subject of ETC patents. All USAF and US Navy pilots are trained on ETC centrifuges. Over 30,000 pilots have been trained on ETC centrifuges. All the high performance pilot training in the world is done on ETC centrifuges. ETC is suing over a number of issues including the demand to finalize the safety analysis and safety testing of the Mission:Space ride. The ownership of intellectual property is also at issue.

ETC designs, develops, installs and maintains aircrew training systems, public entertainment systems, process simulation systems (sterilization and environmental), clinical hyperbaric systems, environmental testing and simulation systems, and related products for domestic and international customers.

This press release may include forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. We have based these forward-looking statements on our current expectations and projections about future events. These forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions about the Company that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from any other future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as "may", "will", "should", "could", "would", "expect", "plan", "anticipate", "believe", "estimate", "continue", or the negative of such terms or similar expressions. Factors that might cause or contribute to such a discrepancy include, but are not limited to, contract cancellations, political unrest in customer countries, unfavorable results in litigation, general economic conditions, and those issues identified from time to time in our Securities and Exchange Commission filings and other public documents, including, without limitation, our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2003.
---------
Questions? Comments on the Gerbil Squad (Plantiffs)?

 

[wdwmagic]

This seems rediculous to me. It's like Vekoma saying they created Big Thunder Mountain just because they supplied the track!

Every Disney ride has components and systems created by external companies. However, it is the job of WDI to hook all of those elemts and companies together into a total ride experience. Which is exactly what happened in Mission: SPACE. ETC may have supplied the multiarm centrifuge, but without everything else, such as the building, story, theme, onboard visuals, audio, interactivity, you would just be spinning round inside a garbage can on arms!

We dont have Otis and United Technology claiming ToT is their creation, even thought they were as heavily involved as ETC were with Space.

ETC seem to be really cutting of their nose off here to spite their face. Its unfortunate.

 

[markc]

I think you're missing the point with how Mission Space was created. Disney had no idea as to how to execute this idea, hence why they went to ETC. ETC, in return, created a unique system never used before. In many respects, without ETC, Disney would not have the ride they have. (Your example of) The tower of terror, on the other hand, uses a pre-exisisting common mechanical device that is easily obtainable.

I think it's unfortunate Disney isn't crediting ETC enough. They were an integral part in putting Mission Space together.

Originally posted by wdwmagic
This seems rediculous to me. It's like Vekoma saying they created Big Thunder Mountain just because they supplied the track!
We dont have Otis and United Technology claiming ToT is their creation, even thought they were as heavily involved as ETC were with Space.

ETC seem to be really cutting of their nose off here to spite their face. Its unfortunate.

 

[MouseMadness]

Originally posted by markc
I think you're missing the point with how Mission Space was created. Disney had no idea as to how to execute this idea, hence why they went to ETC. ETC, in return, created a unique system never used before. In many respects, without ETC, Disney would not have the ride they have. (Your example of) The tower of terror, on the other hand, uses a pre-exisisting common mechanical device that is easily obtainable.

I think it's unfortunate Disney isn't crediting ETC enough. They were an integral part in putting Mission Space together.

I have no idea how any of this works, so my question is... is ETC the ONLY company that could've done what they did? You said without ETC disney wouldn't have their ride...does this mean disney couldn't have taken the job to another company?

 

[CTXRover]

Originally posted by markc
I think you're missing the point with how Mission Space was created. Disney had no idea as to how to execute this idea, hence why they went to ETC. ETC, in return, created a unique system never used before. In many respects, without ETC, Disney would not have the ride they have. (Your example of) The tower of terror, on the other hand, uses a pre-exisisting common mechanical device that is easily obtainable.

I think it's unfortunate Disney isn't crediting ETC enough. They were an integral part in putting Mission Space together.

I don't know the whole story here so first I'll say I could be wrong on the following. But it was my understanding that the Imagineers actually came up with an idea to implement a centrifuge-type technology to allow them to tell the story of space travel that they wanted to portray. But they weren't masters of this technology and thus under the suggestion of Michael Eisner, Imagineers went to ETC. They have experience in such technology and Disney "hired" them to help in the design and implementation of that ride system. But it wasn't solely their idea. In fact, one of the things ETC complains about is that it was the Imagineers who were the ones who made changes to the ride system that resulted in it costing more than orginally estimated, not them, who claim to be the "creators of Mission Space".

Now I by no means underestimate ETC's involvement in designing the multi-arm centrifuge. Without them, we may not have the ride system. But this most recent article is trying to imply they were the sole creators of MS and are angry about the constant talk about the involvement of NASA and Imagineers! The multi-arm centrifuge was built by ETC, but Imagineers knew what they wanted when they "hired" them to help in the design and building of it. Everything else is on the shoulders of Imagineers and NASA's help to make the story realistic. From the high-definition plasma screens used in the pods that are not available to the public, to the visuals, to the interior design and interactivity of the pods, etc. ETC built the ride system, but to say they are the "creator of the Mission Space ride concept" is utterly ridiculous. Imagineers developed the ride concept and hired ETC to help make that dream come true. Otherwise, how would the Imagineers have even known to seek a company like ETC out for their involvement? In fact, according to Disney, unprofessionalism on ETC's side of things resulted in Imagineers taking over the final conceptual design elements of the ride system, including some mind-blowing safety measures. ETC should watch their back. It is one thing to want the recognition they deserve for helping in the design and building of the ride system, but is an entire other thing to imply they are the "creators of the Mission Space ride concept".

 

[netenyahoo]

Mission:Space is Disney's ride. A component of the ride was created by ETC. ETC did not create Mission:Space. they created the mechanism for the ride.

 

[MrPromey]

Regardless of who did what in the design or concept of this attraction, ETC doesn't seem to be playing things too smart. Disney has a great popular new attraction and along with it a lawsuit and a mouthy whiny subcontractor.

Helping design a great product is a good way to get new business. Suing your customer and then trying to drag their reputation through the mud on the side is not.

Up to this point Disney has been the only thing keeping their entertainment division in existence. If I were Universal or anyone else who might be able to afford their services, I'd certainly think twice about doing business with them. I'm sure Disney will take pause before considering any of their services for future attractions.

I just don't understand how ETC thinks this kind of statement helps them.

 

[MrPromey]

Originally posted by markc
I think you're missing the point with how Mission Space was created. Disney had no idea as to how to execute this idea, hence why they went to ETC. ETC, in return, created a unique system never used before. In many respects, without ETC, Disney would not have the ride they have. (Your example of) The tower of terror, on the other hand, uses a pre-exisisting common mechanical device that is easily obtainable.

I think it's unfortunate Disney isn't crediting ETC enough. They were an integral part in putting Mission Space together.

Well, from reading their own statement above it seems Disney did have an idea of how to execute the idea because they went to ETC for the use of this pre-existing technology. According to ETC up there this system has been used before in professional training simulators.

I think Steve was accurate in his comparison to ToT because what runs that attraction is not a common mechanical devise that is easily obtainable. The concept of an elevator is obviously not new (any more than a merry-go-round is) but one that operates the way that one does is. How many elevators have you ever seen that go down at speeds faster than that of gravity, jerk quickly quickly up and down and do it nonstop for ten hours or more a day 365 days a year? That ain't no off the shelf system or we'd have seen it in places off Disney property by now.

 

[WDWFREAK53]

I just think ETC wants their props given to them.

Honestly...if I were ETC...I'd be a little tiffed too if I created a part of something that was "big" and I got little or no credit for it. Where have you seen "ETC" mentioned anywhere?

I dunno, I just feel that HP and Disney are taking all the credit for it...and in their defense...they were major players (HP for the money...Disney for the storyline/ride experience...and ETC...the company who was the 3rd leg of the triangle that made Mission:Space a reality is being left out.) (It's kinda like in school when you're working on a project...one person buys the equipment, one person comes up with the idea, and the other figures out how to "build" the project...and only 2 getting the good grade)

 

[WDWFREAK53]

Originally posted by MrPromey
Well, from reading their own statement above it seems Disney did have an idea of how to execute the idea because they went to ETC for the use of this pre-existing technology. According to ETC up there this system has been used before in professional training simulators.

I think Steve was accurate in his comparison to ToT because what runs that attraction is not a common mechanical devise that is easily obtainable. The concept of an elevator is obviously not new (any more than a merry-go-round is) but one that operates the way that one does is. How many elevators have you ever seen that go down at speeds faster than that of gravity, jerk quickly quickly up and down and do it nonstop for ten hours or more a day 365 days a year? That ain't no off the shelf system or we'd have seen it in places off Disney property by now.

(don't forget...it's a free roaming "elevator" too...that moves into the shaft mechanism )

 

[josh_e_washie]

This is a load of crap!!!
I think that disney's recognizing ETC for their part in Mission: Space was the amount of money they payed them! I mean what does ETC expect? A sign outside the attraction that says Mission: Space- developed by ETC?? I don't think so!

 

[MrPromey]

Originally posted by WDWFREAK53
I just think ETC wants their props given to them.

Honestly...if I were ETC...I'd be a little tiffed too if I created a part of something that was "big" and I got little or no credit for it. Where have you seen "ETC" mentioned anywhere?

I dunno, I just feel that HP and Disney are taking all the credit for it...and in their defense...they were major players (HP for the money...Disney for the storyline/ride experience...and ETC...the company who was the 3rd leg of the triangle that made Mission:Space a reality is being left out.) (It's kinda like in school when you're working on a project...one person buys the equipment, one person comes up with the idea, and the other figures out how to "build" the project...and only 2 getting the good grade)

I get what you are saying and if ETC were just some eccentric fellow doing it all for the glory, I could see him wanting ''props" but ETC is a corporation that was subcontracted to do work on an attraction. In the professional world the reward for such work generally tends to be monetary payment unless otherwise agreed upon. It also usually includes something to stick on your resume unless their are non-disclosure agreements that go along with the contract.

The fact that Disney is advertising themselves, the sponsor of the attraction and U.S. astronauts in their national campaigns shouldn't exactly come as a shock to anyone because unless ETC gave them a break on the price in exchange for advertising, they aren't supposed to be out there getting props.

The average joe on the street has never heard of ETC and touting their involvement on commercials and press releases isn't going to help sell tickets.

Can you think of any other Disney attraction that heavily advertises any of the companies that manufacture equipment for the attraction who aren't sponsors?

 

[CTXRover]

Originally posted by MrPromey
. If I were Universal or anyone else who might be able to afford their services, I'd certainly think twice about doing business with them. I'm sure Disney will take pause before considering any of their services for future attractions.

You've made some excellent points. And I wholeheartedly agree with your above statement. ETC is really just shooting themselves in the foot. What other company would PAY them for work if they know that they will turn around and start publicly "crying" because they aren't getting any national recognition. really, that is all this press release was. It has no merit to their law suit for more $$ they feel are owed to them because Disney cut them out during testing since Disney actually developed most of the safety devices and were upset by "unprofessionalism" shown by ETC. ETC knew when they signed the contract that Disney wasn't going to nationally release who and how the ride system was built. I imagine there was some type of written contract that even forbids ETC from publicly releasing the specific aspects the ride system. Had they been told that they would get recognition if they agreed to work for Disney, then maybe they have a true concern. But I guarentee they didn't. Disney has never promoted the company that provided aspects of the ride system before, why now? It would be like publicly thanking Vekoma for designing the RnRc track. I just think ETC got themselves into something a lot bigger than they were and now realize they could have benefited from being known as being associated with MS. But this wasn't the way to go about it.

 

[Sir Hiss527]

Here we go again...

 

[WDWFREAK53]

Heheh, don't get me wrong here guys...I think it's a crying game from ETC too. I just see where they are coming from...that's all

(But, like Mr. Promey said...they SHOULD know because none of the other Disney attractions mention subcontractors...only sponsors)

 

[DMC-12]

Originally posted by X2CommNavISTC
Under our contract, ETC licensed its technology for a one-time use at EPCOT Center. Also, ETC's contract requires that future Mission:Space type rides be purchased from ETC."

Isnt this suit about Disney not keeping there part of the bargin...

I mean.. if a M:S clone were to be built in another (disney) park ETC has the contract... BUT, I remember reading somewhere that Disney is not honoring that part of the contract anymore, therefore Disney is in breach *allegedly*. And ETC has every right to be angry.

I have to find that older article... *scratches head*

 

[Dr Albert Falls]

.

 

[Testtrack321]

ETC is suing the ISTC ASAP.

Dont' you love acronims?

Anyway, the law suit was based on two things, first was that ETC was removed from the final testing, which they say is critical to the rides safety and their ride making skills. The other thing was a contract dispute where Disney had a certain amount they would pay unless it went over, it went over, they renegotiated the contract, and then they went over, but only payed what they said in the contract. ETC wants the full.

 

[wdwmagic]

Originally posted by markc
I think you're missing the point with how Mission Space was created. Disney had no idea as to how to execute this idea, hence why they went to ETC. ETC, in return, created a unique system never used before. In many respects, without ETC, Disney would not have the ride they have. (Your example of) The tower of terror, on the other hand, uses a pre-exisisting common mechanical device that is easily obtainable.

I think it's unfortunate Disney isn't crediting ETC enough. They were an integral part in putting Mission Space together.

Disney knew exactly how to execute their idea of a next gen simulator. NASA had been using centrifuges made my companies other than ETC for 10s of years. It isnt new technology. The challenge for Mission Space was to make it multi-arm and therefore high capacity in nature. Knowing they wanted a multiarm centrifuge, they sourced a contractor to carry out the work to WDIs specification.

On your comment that ToT ride system is easily obtainable...

The Tower ride system is as unique in the world as Mission Space's centrifuge is. There is no other elevator system in existance that has the performance levels of ToT, or the capability to move horizontally. However, the partners involved the creation of that, OTIS and United, do not start law suits claiming that ToT is theirs, as they realise they were contracted to contribute systems to the attraction, and that is where it ends. Hopefully OTIS and United have been rewarded with contacts for the new ToTs around the world. However I would expect ETC will not be working with WDI again.

 

[wdwmagic]

Originally posted by MouseMadness
I have no idea how any of this works, so my question is... is ETC the ONLY company that could've done what they did? You said without ETC disney wouldn't have their ride...does this mean disney couldn't have taken the job to another company?

ETC is not the only company that could have done this. The version of MS planned for Tokyo is to have hardware produced by a Japanese centrifuge company.