Marvel in Hollywood Studios?

[bubbles1812]

Stay tuned....

Might want to become a regular reader of the Blue Sky Disney blog also. Then you will be up to speed.

"Stay tuned" is another JT euphemism for "I don't know what the hell I'm talking about and have no proof whatsoever to back up my crazy theories"...

 

[lebeau]

Stay tuned is another JT euphemism for "I don't know what the hell I'm talking about and have no proof whatsoever to back up my crazy theories"...

"And also, read my blog."

 

[MichWolv]

Very interesting. I'm glad though, because I would hate Mickey to be anywhere but Disney, that seems wrong. So the current rights expire in 2019? Disney can then push to re-extend them then. I like that, actually.

Still for Marvel, the thing is that eventually, if they wanted it in the parks, they could make it happen. They would essentially give up any exclusive rights they have, which would be incredibly stupid, but they could. However, it's pointless to argue anything like that further since, again, it would be stupid of them.

Good find!

Disney will push for extension, but it will take an act of congress to grant it.

Even if the copyright expires, though, it expires with relation to what was created in 1923. Current versions of Mickey look different, and Disney would probably argue that the current version of Mickey wasn't created until, say 1940 with Fantasia, so while somebody might be able to slap a black-and-white 1923-era Mickey and sell it without paying Disney anything, it wouldn't be able to do so with a color version, or a version with Mickey's current look. If it ever gets to that point, I'm sure there will be court battles galore.

 

[doctornick]

What @lebeau said... They've tried, and I'm sure they will continue to try but that doesn't mean any new characters will be successful. And again you seem to be doing that selective reading thing... The mega popular characters of 60 years ago are the same mega popular characters today. So why would that change in the years to come? You think Spider Man and Iron Man are really going to go out of style? They've proven to be characters popular for the long haul.

Not that I disagree with your point, but Iron Man only became "in style" as a result of the recent film series. As a character, he was far far down the popularity/public recognition scale of Marvel characters. You pretty much had to be a comic book reader to be aware of him. The fact that he's a 60 year old character is incidental to that.

So, it's conceivable that some other Marvel character (old and established or relatively new) could generate the same level of popularity with similarly well received film. And it's possible that if such a character achieved public consciousness and was not part of a family of characters used at IOA, then said character could be used at WDW without a problem. That's a lot of constants that borders on the impossible, so I'm not expecting it.

I just think that Iron Man is a good example of the point that a character can become very popular and well known even if he isn't right now.

 

[doctornick]

Even if Sony has a Spider-flop at the box office some day, they aren't going to let that cash cow slip away. Not ever.

Yes, I'm expecting Sony (with Spider Man) and Fox (with the X-Men) to constantly be making films in those families to retain the rights forever. At least until some time in the future when super hero films are not the guaranteed cash cow they are today.

The Fantastic Four is an interesting one though, as the previous films didn't do all that well and they aren't quite as well know/popular as Spider-Man and the X-Men. Fox apparently intends to make a reboot for that group, but they planned to do so for Daredevil as well and it didn't happen (and rights reverted back to Marvel/Disney). I'm kind of hoping that the FF reboot does not proceed because I think they would be a good branching off option for the Marvel Cinematic Universal if Disney could get the rights.

Outside of Daredevil, the other rights that Disney got back (Blade, Punisher) don't really fit in well for crossing over with the Avengers stuff.

 

[marni1971]

Yes, this is known now. But before the project some were saying no Kuka was allowed whether on a track or not. Similar to how some talk about Marvel in absolutes when no one really knows specifics on what the future holds.

Well, "some" were wrong weren't they?

Happens a lot around here.

 

[lebeau]

Disney will push for extension, but it will take an act of congress to grant it.

I'll wager a nickle that the necessary action will be taken by congress when the time comes. Disney isn't the only company that will push for it.

The Fantastic Four is an interesting one though, as the previous films didn't do all that well and they aren't quite as well know/popular as Spider-Man and the X-Men. Fox apparently intends to make a reboot for that group, but they planned to do so for Daredevil as well and it didn't happen (and rights reverted back to Marvel/Disney). I'm kind of hoping that the FF reboot does not proceed because I think they would be a good branching off option for the Marvel Cinematic Universal if Disney could get the rights.

I guarantee the FF reboot will happen. Fox thinks they can top the first two movies. The first one grossed over $300 mill world wide. The second did nearly that much. There's no way they let it go without taking a swing at it.

If the new FF flops (which seems highly unlikely given the current popularity of Marvel super heroes) Fox may consider letting it revert to Disney. But I think this is highly unlikely. I will never say never, but I would be very surprised to see Disney get the rights back any time in the near future.

 

[Bparso87]

I'll wager a nickle that the necessary action will be taken by congress when the time comes. Disney isn't the only company that will push for it.



I guarantee the FF reboot will happen. Fox thinks they can top the first two movies. The first one grossed over $300 mill world wide. The second did nearly that much. There's no way they let it go without taking a swing at it.

If the new FF flops (which seems highly unlikely given the current popularity of Marvel super heroes) Fox may consider letting it revert to Disney. But I think this is highly unlikely. I will never say never, but I would be very surprised to see Disney get the rights back any time in the near future.

I believe there is a director attached to FF.

 

[doctornick]

I believe there is a director attached to FF.

I think there was a director attached to the Daredevil reboot, but it didn't end up happening and the rights ended up going back to Marvel.

That said, I fully expect Fox to make a FF film and keep the rights. I'm just hoping, as a fan, that they don't because it would be addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe for crossovers. It would have been nice if Disney could have bought back the rights before the Marvel universe blew up.

 

[lebeau]

I think there was a director attached to the Daredevil reboot, but it didn't end up happening and the rights ended up going back to Marvel.

That said, I fully expect Fox to make a FF film and keep the rights. I'm just hoping, as a fan, that they don't because it would be addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe for crossovers. It would have been nice if Disney could have bought back the rights before the Marvel universe blew up.

I'm fine keeping the X-Men, Avengers and Fantastic Four playgrounds separate. There's enough material and characters in all of them for several movies. Inter-team crossovers would get too convoluted.

The problem with Daredevil is that he's not Batman.

 

[George]

Mickey Mouse is protected by trademark, which doesn't expire as long as the owner maintains it. The stories of the cartoon shorts that Mickey starred in will, barring an act of Congress, fall into public domain eventually, but Mickey, the character, will not. Mickey will never be seen (legally) outside of Disney property. I can't say for sure whether Marvel superhero characters are protected by trademark, but I think it is safe to assume they are. It is advantageous to do so for recurring characters like cartoon stars (e.g. Mickey, Popeye, Daffy Duck) or superheroes, so I can't imagine why they wouldn't be. Long story short, Disney is not going to be able to wait for the Marvel characters to fall into public domain because that simply will not happen.

Uh-Oh. I just got a billion dollar loan to build "Mickey Mouse's Lots o' Fun Adventure Park" here in Indiana in a few years. I hope my loan officer doesn't read this.

 

[lazyboy97o]

A fate that is truly worse than death...

Is there any way that a link to the Disney/Marvel/Universal contract can be posted on the main page of the forum so that we can avoid all of this happening again next week and the week after and the week after that, etc?

What good would that do? People openly state their refusal to read the contract when the links are repeatedly provided and its easy to find with a Google search.

 

[Bparso87]

I think there was a director attached to the Daredevil reboot, but it didn't end up happening and the rights ended up going back to Marvel.

That said, I fully expect Fox to make a FF film and keep the rights. I'm just hoping, as a fan, that they don't because it would be addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe for crossovers. It would have been nice if Disney could have bought back the rights before the Marvel universe blew up.

Josh tank is to direct release date 2015. Daredevil and ghost rider r back with marvel.

 

[CJR]

Mickey Mouse is protected by trademark, which doesn't expire as long as the owner maintains it. The stories of the cartoon shorts that Mickey starred in will, barring an act of Congress, fall into public domain eventually, but Mickey, the character, will not. Mickey will never be seen (legally) outside of Disney property. I can't say for sure whether Marvel superhero characters are protected by trademark, but I think it is safe to assume they are. It is advantageous to do so for recurring characters like cartoon stars (e.g. Mickey, Popeye, Daffy Duck) or superheroes, so I can't imagine why they wouldn't be. Long story short, Disney is not going to be able to wait for the Marvel characters to fall into public domain because that simply will not happen.

You are correct. I didn't realize Mickey was trademarked, but it makes sense, a quick online search confirmed it. I don't know about the Marvel characters, but why would Disney want to lose any exclusive rights they have if they can keep them? Trademarks are harder to get than a copyright is, which is why things like Oz when into public domain so they might not be able to trademark every character. Still, the most important ones should be able to be trademarked, at least one would think.

Here's an interesting article about Mickey Mouse: http://www.tourolawreview.com/2013/04/mickey-mouse-in-the-year-2023-what-happens-now/

 

[Magenta Panther]

I heard a rumor that the Hollywood Studios Expansion will be primarily based on Pixar, Marvel and Lucasfilm. Marvel? Yes, Marvel. Apparently the Marvel Character license with Universal ends in 2015! And by that time Universal can not have any rides that use the Marvel characters. This means that the park will have to re-theme all of those attractions. Again, this is only a rumor.

It's completely and utter BS!

I honestly don't understand why some people are so eager to see Marvel junk at WDW when there is a perfectly good park that already HAS Marvel junk in it that they could go visit - UNIVERSAL. IT'S JUST DOWN THE ROAD, PEOPLE. YOU CAN RIDE THE HULK COASTER AND THE SPIDERMAN RIDE and all sorts of other stuff featuring ludicrous musculature in tights. Sheesh!

 

[ChrisFL]

It's completely and utter BS!

I honestly don't understand why some people are so eager to see Marvel junk at WDW when there is a perfectly good park that already HAS Marvel junk in it that they could go visit - UNIVERSAL. IT'S JUST DOWN THE ROAD, PEOPLE. YOU CAN RIDE THE HULK COASTER AND THE SPIDERMAN RIDE and all sorts of other stuff featuring ludicrous musculature in tights. Sheesh!

hahaha, awesome!

 

[Geaux_rebs]

what about a marvel hotel O.O

There are plenty of things WDW could do without placing marvel in a "theme park". A hotel, restaurant (with meet and greets), stark expo at downtown disney (retheme disney quest?), downtown disney gift shop, mini golf, etc. The marvel monorail proves that unless, like the contract says, its in a theme park -- it is ok. Now im sure you could argue over dowtown disney but all the other things are easy. With these movies making billions, if wdw sees more money on the table they will bite.

 

[Captain Chaos]

There are plenty of things WDW could do without placing marvel in a "theme park". A hotel, restaurant (with meet and greets), stark expo at downtown disney (retheme disney quest?), downtown disney gift shop, mini golf, etc. The marvel monorail proves that unless, like the contract says, its in a theme park -- it is ok. Now im sure you could argue over dowtown disney but all the other things are easy. With these movies making billions, if wdw sees more money on the table they will bite.

But the monorail didn't prove anything... Universal still had their lawyers on the phone with Disney... In the end, a wrap on the monorail to promote a movie is really nothing... Add characters to DTD or a meet and greet, though it isn't in a "theme park" and you bet Universal will take it to arbitration...

 

[lebeau]

There are plenty of things WDW could do without placing marvel in a "theme park". A hotel, restaurant (with meet and greets), stark expo at downtown disney (retheme disney quest?), downtown disney gift shop, mini golf, etc. The marvel monorail proves that unless, like the contract says, its in a theme park -- it is ok. Now im sure you could argue over dowtown disney but all the other things are easy. With these movies making billions, if wdw sees more money on the table they will bite.

Having a billboard slapped on the monorail is very different from building a permanent structure or having a character meal outside the parks. We won't know for sure unless Disney attempts something like this. But I imagine they would get slapped down big time if they tried. Having said that, there is very little chance they will try something so clearly in violation of the intent of the contract.

 

[lebeau]

But the monorail didn't prove anything... Universal still had their lawyers on the phone with Disney... In the end, a wrap on the monorail to promote a movie is really nothing... Add characters to DTD or a meet and greet, though it isn't in a "theme park" and you bet Universal will take it to arbitration...

I think the "Marvel must come to WDW" crowd has this image of Disney putting all it's top minds in a room desperately looking for some way around the Universal contract. They don't realize that Disney doesn't care one bit about putting Marvel in WDW. If they had any idea how little Disney thought about Marvel at WDW they would be shocked. These people are putting more effort into changing the status quo than Disney is.