News bye bye bugs: Marvel Land announced, opens 2020

[Old Mouseketeer]

I don't think so. I believe it only applies to parks east of the Mississippi.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1262449/000119312510008732/dex1057.htm

It's more nuanced than that. There are many layers to what Disney can and cannot do. They can build attractions at DL with certain characters, but they can't use the Marvel name in advertising or even on the attraction marquee. That's why "Super Hero HQ" above SW Launch Bay used the "red brick" motif in the logo design, but it didn't actually contain the word Marvel. However, you did see the word Marvel inside, both on merchandise and in the comic book wallpaper, etc.

 

[NormC]

The contract is quite clear. Please show me where it states that Disney (Marvel) cannot use the name in a California park. I may have missed it in my multiple readings of the contract.

 

[Phroobar]

This is why I hate lawyers.

 

[Ismael Flores]

Is it bad that the only good thing I see in this news is that Marvel can't ruin Tomorrowland now? I'm just so fatigued by Marvel now it'll be nice having Disneyland as an ecape from it.

rumors still around is the possibility of another Tron clone in tomorrowland. The ride looks like fun but I'm hoping that if that is the case that they utilize the room better and give us a more enclosed coaster. If not then maybe the outside portion can be built over something else so that they give use overlapping attractions even if it means keeping the autopia but in a modified theme. Might be kind of cool to have autopia cars at ground level while having the coaster zipping overhead.

 

[britain]

rumors still around is the possibility of another Tron clone in tomorrowland. The ride looks like fun but I'm hoping that if that is the case that they utilize the room better and give us a more enclosed coaster. If not then maybe the outside portion can be built over something else so that they give use overlapping attractions even if it means keeping the autopia but in a modified theme. Might be kind of cool to have autopia cars at ground level while having the coaster zipping overhead.

If they could get Tron to essentially be what the Rocket Rods was intended to be, then I'm all for it.

 

[dweezil78]

rumors still around is the possibility of another Tron clone in tomorrowland. The ride looks like fun but I'm hoping that if that is the case that they utilize the room better and give us a more enclosed coaster. If not then maybe the outside portion can be built over something else so that they give use overlapping attractions even if it means keeping the autopia but in a modified theme. Might be kind of cool to have autopia cars at ground level while having the coaster zipping overhead.

I still hate the idea of having the only two indoor coasters -- both with totally different themes/designs -- right next to each other. The decision to build this right next to Space Mountain at WDW is baffling to me.

 

[Curious Constance]

As a counter to whole 'no more IP' argument -- if the masses don't really know who Dr. Strange is and the market hasn't been over saturated with his character or his story, wouldn't going with a more unknown Marvel hero like him allow for a more original experience?

i.e. If you don't know the character or his backstory, what's really the difference with this being tied to IP or WDI having come up with it on its own for a unique attraction?

Personally, I think Dr. Strange is pretty rad and is one of the more interesting characters as far as his abilities go, could see that lending itself well to some neat tricks w/ the way he opens portals and all that!

I don't know, maybe. I still think there will be a lot of people wondering why the Sherlock guy suddenly shows up. Because it won't be set up to be obvious what's going on or who he is unless you know the Marvel stories.

 

[dweezil78]

I don't know, maybe. I still think there will be a lot of people wondering why the Sherlock guy suddenly shows up. Because it won't be set up to be obvious what's going on or who he is unless you know the Marvel stories.

Lol, I have a feeling that if people don't recognize him as Dr. Strange, they are not going to recognize him as Sherlock.

Also re: not being obvious what's going on / who he is, isn't that the same of any original attraction without any previous established backstory? It's up to WDI to set that up during the queue/pre-show/etc.

 

[DanielBB8]

I don't know, maybe. I still think there will be a lot of people wondering why the Sherlock guy suddenly shows up. Because it won't be set up to be obvious what's going on or who he is unless you know the Marvel stories.

Or why the Khan guy showed up. Even less people watched him as Sherlock Holmes.

 

[Disney Irish]

The contract is quite clear. Please show me where it states that Disney (Marvel) cannot use the name in a California park. I may have missed it in my multiple readings of the contract.

In this case P&R is the licensee as they license the characters from Marvel Studio (even though they are all part of Disney) so this part applies:

East or West of The Mississippi - permitted uses shall be limited to the use of specific Marvel characters and Marvel may not permit a licensee to use the name “Marvel” as part of the attraction name or marketing.

Also Disney has owned Marvel now for almost 10 years. Don't you think their lawyers (some of the best IP lawyers on the planet) would have found a way around the contract if they could.

 

[NormC]

In this case P&R is the licensee as they license the characters from Marvel Studio (even though they are all part of Disney) so this part applies:

East or West of The Mississippi - permitted uses shall be limited to the use of specific Marvel characters and Marvel may not permit a licensee to use the name “Marvel” as part of the attraction name or marketing.

Thanks. I did not think that individual departments had to license anything from their parent corporation. Does P&R license Buzz and Woody from Disney Pixar?

Also Disney has owned Marvel now for 6 years. Don't you think their lawyers (some of the best IP lawyers on the planet) would have found a way around the contract if they could.

They do not need a way around the contract. They are content with it the way it is.

 

[Phroobar]

Or why the Khan guy showed up. Even less people watched him as Sherlock Holmes.

I personally see him as Smog the Dragon but that's me.

rumors still around is the possibility of another Tron clone in tomorrowland. The ride looks like fun but I'm hoping that if that is the case that they utilize the room better and give us a more enclosed coaster. If not then maybe the outside portion can be built over something else so that they give use overlapping attractions even if it means keeping the autopia but in a modified theme. Might be kind of cool to have autopia cars at ground level while having the coaster zipping overhead.

The autopia cars need to look like this:

with glow in the dark street markers like the UK might be getting. The cars should be electric and no center rail and self guiding.

 

[Disney Irish]

Thanks. I did not think that individual departments had to license anything from their parent corporation. Does P&R license Buzz and Woody from Disney Pixar?

Yes my understanding is that P&R licenses IP being used for attractions from the content provider, even within Disney itself.

They do not need a way around the contract. They are content with it the way it is.

Actually they aren't, they have been trying to find a way around the contract for years so they can put in Marvel attractions in WDW.

 

[NormC]

Actually they aren't, they have been trying to find a way around the contract for years so they can put in Marvel attractions in WDW.

I do not believe that is true. I could be wrong though.

They have plenty of IP to stick in WDW without dipping into the Marvel pool. They can put Marvel in all the other parks. They collect a check from Universal, albeit a relatively small one, for doing nothing and they reap the rewards of all the merchandising in Universal.

 

[Disney Irish]

I do not believe that is true. I could be wrong though.

They have plenty of IP to stick in WDW without dipping into the Marvel pool. They can put Marvel in all the other parks. They collect a check from Universal, albeit a relatively small one, for doing nothing and they reap the rewards of all the merchandising in Universal.

Why would you believe that Disney would want to keep one of the largest money making franchises out of WDW?

Also you do realize they are putting Marvel in WDW, its just they can't use certain characters, which is why they are trying to find a way around the contract. They don't want anyone to dictate which of their own characters they can and can't use in the parks.

 

[NormC]

I am quite aware of what they have been and are doing. If they really wanted to get out of the contract they would have written a fat check and been done with it. There is always a solution. They are currently making money from the contract instead of spending tons to get out of it. Disney was fully aware of the terms when they purchased Marvel. Marvel has been a gold mine for Disney.

 

[Disney Irish]

I am quite aware of what they have been and are doing. If they really wanted to get out of the contract they would have written a fat check and been done with it. There is always a solution. They are currently making money from the contract instead of spending tons to get out of it. Disney was fully aware of the terms when they purchased Marvel. Marvel has been a gold mine for Disney.

Except its not that simple. This is the reason its taken so long to get Marvel in the parks. Disney wants out of the contract, Universal won't let them, so its not as simple as writing a big fat check. Until the tides change it'll remain the same.

Some, including myself, believe that once the Fox merger completes Disney will be able to work with Universal on a trade. Fox properties are far more valuable for Universal in terms of the parks than Marvel. So trading the continued Universal use of Fox characters for regaining the park rights to Marvel is what Disney will likely get done.

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

Except its not that simple. This is the reason its taken so long to get Marvel in the parks. Disney wants out of the contract, Universal won't let them, so its not as simple as writing a big fat check. Until the tides change it'll remain the same.

Some, including myself, believe that once the Fox merger completes Disney will be able to work with Universal on a trade. Fox properties are far more valuable for Universal in terms of the parks than Marvel. So trading the continued Universal use of Fox characters for regaining the park rights to Marvel is what Disney will likely get done.

Disney does not want out of the contract. It's a mutually beneficial system at the moment, and no one feels compelled to challenge or change it.

Could that change in the future? Sure. Will it? Probably not.

 

[Disney Irish]

Disney does not want out of the contract. It's a mutually beneficial system at the moment, and no one feels compelled to challenge or change it.

Could that change in the future? Sure. Will it? Probably not.

Yes Disney wants out of the contract because its a completely one-sided contract. So not its not mutually beneficial, it gives all the power to Universal. There is a reason why WDW is only getting a GotG attraction instead of Avengers or other characters that are going into the other parks.

I actually expect a change soon after the Fox merger is complete.

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

Yes Disney wants out of the contract because its a completely one-sided contract. So not its not mutually beneficial, it gives all the power to Universal. There is a reason why WDW is only getting a GotG attraction instead of Avengers or other characters that are going into the other parks.

I actually expect a change soon after the Fox merger is complete.

No one at Disney wants out of the contract. They just wanted to build a Marvel ride at WDW, so the legal team figured out which characters will work, and voila - GOTG at Epcot.

Trust me when I tell you, no one at Disney with any real power wants out of the contract. It's not an issue, let alone a priority.