M:S Contractor Sues Disney

[Tim S.]

Here's some interesting news from the main supplier of the technology used in M:S.

The M:S news is in the second half of the article.

http://philadelphia.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/stories/2003/07/14/daily59.html

 

[wdwmagic]

Hmmmm this part sounds interesting..

"ETC said it is suing the customer to recover damages for the alleged contract breaches and to confirm its ownership of the technology used in the ride."

Sounds like Disney are trying to prevent that ride system from going elsewhere. I was concerned from a couple of years back that ETC would market this ride system to others, particularly when they created a dedicated thempark ride system subsidery.

Didnt something similiar happen with the Soarin ride system at DCA?

Will be interesting to see what happens.
Thanks for the update!

 

[timoteo]

Could this hold up opening? Knowing Disney they got their bases covered and then some. I wonder if they are scre#ing over ETC?

 

[asics1cc]

Why assume?

Why should we assume they are sueing Disney? I didn't see them explicitly mention anything about The Disney Company being on the receiving end of the law suit. Is their information somewhere that I'm missing?
Thanks,

 

[timoteo]

They say they are suing. see quote.

"ETC said it is suing the customer to recover damages for the alleged contract breaches and to confirm its ownership of the technology used in the ride."

As much as I love Disney. I would bet they have somehow tricked ETC and just now ETC is realizing. Disney protects their interests and rightly so, but they are notorius for doing it in a somewhat tricky and cut-throat manner. Many a small contractor has been put out of business by Disney. I am sure that is part of the reason ETC set up the separate company in the first place.

 

[pyschotropic]

That's kind of funny because I had recently e-mailed the ETC company asking them a few questions about their centrifuge product just purely for interest, and this morning I had received a message on my anwsering machine from the company telling me they would be happy to awnser any questions about their BigMac centrifuge product. Knowing Disney how they would probably want the rights to this and the company wanting to market this product to other customers I could see how this would cause problems between both corporations sounds to me like we won't see Disney and ETC doing buisness anymore mabye they'll start working with Universal just to get back at Disney. :lol: By the way did ETC do Soarin Over California for Disney as well?

 

[SirNim]

"In its annual report, ETC said it expected its work for Disney "to be significantly reduced" in its 2004 fiscal year."

:lol:
:hammer:

 

[wdwmagic]

Originally posted by pyschotropic
By the way did ETC do Soarin Over California for Disney as well?

No it wasnt ETC, but I am sure there was a similar issue with various legal things going on between Disney and the contractor who worked on the original ride system.

 

[OnWithTheShow]

The difference is that ETC actually designed the ride system for Mission Space while the Soarin ride system was designed by WDI.

 

[wdwmagic]

Originally posted by OnWithTheShow
The difference is that ETC actually designed the ride system for Mission Space while the Soarin ride system was designed by WDI.

OK it came back to me, I think the dispute was with IWERKS, who originally developed the concept for a handglider type fly over attraction, and also produced the optics system (not sure about the actual ride system).

 

[jmarc63]

when the contracts were written, shouldn't there been alot of leagal-ease stating that Disney wanted ownership of the technology and any other rights disney wanted, seems like with out knowing what was in the contract some lawyer some where did something to get this to this point.

 

[jmarc63]

Re: Why assume?

Originally posted by asics1cc
Why should we assume they are sueing Disney? I didn't see them explicitly mention anything about The Disney Company being on the receiving end of the law suit. Is their information somewhere that I'm missing?
Thanks,

The assumption is based on the clues in the anual report and in the article, Even though you should never assume anything, we base this on the well known fact that Disney was there Biggest customer the last few years in preperation and design for M:S.

 

[mac388]

"The company did not identify the customer in the press release containing Mitchell's statement. Mitchell was out of ETC's headquarters Friday afternoon and couldn't be reached for comment."

Now I know that most of us can put two and two together, but it seems the article does that for us. I think what that person meant earlier in the post is that when it comes down to it, it's the newspaper doing the research that Disney was their largest contractor and "maybe" it could be them. More likely than not, I'm sure it is.

Where were ETC's contract lawyers in all of this? I love Disney and all, but if they were trying to buy something from me, I'd go over the contract with a fine tooth comb.

I also remember last year hearing many Cast Members talk about the fact that Disney had bought the contract for ten years so that no other theme park could make something like M:S. I know it's a rumor, but that's what this site is based on!

 

[wdwmagic]

It seems that the dispute is over system testing, and not ownership of the ride system. It is alleged that at the last minute WDI decided to do all the testing of the ride system in house, and cut ETC out of the loop. ETC were relying on the testing phase as a significant part of their income for the project. Hence the law suit for breach of contract.

 

[timoteo]

If Disney is doing there own testing....

So if the thing breaks down, a bolt flys off, etc. I guess Disney will not be looking to ETC for any damages.

Pinky to corner of mouth. Ri i i i ght.

 

[Lovecraft]

My guess, without seeing the contract, is that there is some clause within which is a bit ambiguous about testing.

The contract probably states that testing of the ride system will be performed by the manufacturer, but probably does not sufficiently define what "testing" is.. or there is some ambiguity in the contract in a clause that allows for someone other than the manufacturer to do the final testing.

 

[timoteo]

That is a good guess.

 

[Mission: SPACE]

I don't have any specific idea of what's going on with this, but it wouldn't surprise me if Disney didn't outwit someone again... They've done it in the past, and they'll do it again.

I'd personally rather see a law suit over the issue of testing the ride rather than of creating a ride with similar technology. I'd like to see Mission:SPACE be the only ride of its kind as long as possible. Gives that other place down the street (NOT naming ANY names!!!) a little competition on thrills... :sohappy: :sohappy: :sohappy: :lookaroun :sohappy:

 

[prberk]

All of this simply emphasizes why Imagineering ought to be back in the business of designing all aspects of the rides (or as many as are critical and practical) for Walt Disney, as they used to.

It is why they have so many patents, and why the Walt Disney Company parks are unique.

Own everything from the beginning, and there is no dispute.

 

[Shaman]

Originally posted by prberk
All of this simply emphasizes why Imagineering ought to be back in the business of designing all aspects of the rides (or as many as are critical and practical) for Walt Disney, as they used to.
It is why they have so many patents, and why the Walt Disney Company parks are unique.
Own everything from the beginning, and there is no dispute.

Well said! I think we would see rides 100 times better than what we are seeing now (can you imagine something better than M:S) if only Disney would be a little more liberal in spending and a little more open to what imagineering has to say. I think if they would allow imagineering a little breathing room we would see Disney coming out with true Disney caliber attractions.

And though its not fair if Disney is screwing ETC over; serves the them right for not paying attention (ETC I think will lose the lawsuit). But hey atleast they won't make that mistake again.