Now that Disney owns Marvel (even tho they are still operating on their own) what happens with the Marvel themed rides in Islands of Adventure i mean Spider man is on all the logos for Universal
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Marvel
- Thread starter WereMagicLives
- Start date
wouldn't you think that when Disney bought Marvel they would have gotten rights to something as big as that?
DTM93
Member
Well no actually.
I was doing some searching in a previous topic and came up with this:
'Not going to happen. Universal has a license agreement in perpetuity with Marvel, which grants them rights to Marvel until Universal gives them up. Until then, Disney can't really do anything with Marvel in the parks in Florida.'
So I was right.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Those attractions and those characters can stay in Islands of Adventure for as long as Universal wants them to stay there.
Universal owns the theme park rights for all of the characters currently in their park. These rights are for all parks east of the Mississippi river. Disney can use other Marvel characters not currently represented in Islands of Adventure, but while there are hundreds of Marvel characters not currently being used, Islands of Adventure is already using the most prominant ones.
wizards8507
Active Member
Well no actually.
I was doing some searching in a previous topic and came up with this:
'Not going to happen. Universal has a license agreement in perpetuity with Marvel, which grants them rights to Marvel until Universal gives them up. Until then, Disney can't really do anything with Marvel in the parks in Florida.'
So I was right.
You were sort of right.
Universal has those rights ONLY in "theme parks in the Eastern United States." Furthermore, just like Universal had to pay Marvel every year for the rights, they now have to pay DISNEY for the rights.
But the contract also gives Disney a number of rights over Universal, including the ability to audit Universal Orlando’s books, to ensure it is paying the appropriate amount of royalties, and the power to review Universal’s promotional materials when they feature Marvel characters.
haha! thats gotta be like Disney stuck a knife right into universal:ROFLOL:
DTM93
Member
Aw right, well thank you for the explanation I never knew that!
Is that why there is merchandise of Marvel in DLR because it's on the West Coast? (I may be wrong, I haven't seen any pictures of WDW with Marvel merchandise.)
UrbanDonovan
Active Member
Aw right, well thank you for the explanation I never knew that!
Is that why there is merchandise of Marvel in DLR because it's on the West Coast? (I may be wrong, I haven't seen any pictures of WDW with Marvel merchandise.)
I saw quite a bit of Marvel merchandise at DTD the other day.
Wilt Dasney
Well-Known Member
WDW is flush with Marvel goodies...in the stores, anyway.
S
stphnbogert
Disney owns Marvel. Universal currently has a contract to use Marvel characters in their park until a certain time. They however can't renew that contract and once the contract is up they must remove all Marvel themes in the park.
wizards8507
Active Member
Aw right, well thank you for the explanation I never knew that!
Is that why there is merchandise of Marvel in DLR because it's on the West Coast? (I may be wrong, I haven't seen any pictures of WDW with Marvel merchandise.)
I'm not sure how the merch contract works, but I believe the "east coast exclusivity" only applies to attractions. Future Marvel movies have a unique setup as well. Future movies include Thor, X-Men: First Class, Captain America, Ghost Rider, The Avengers, Spider-Man, The Wolverine, and Iron Man 3. I think Universal has the rights to the first 2 or 3, but I'm not positive.
Universal has the right to perpetually renew. The contract doesn't have an end-date.
S
stphnbogert
If they were to renew they would have to go through Disney.
spider-man, fantastic 4 and the x men all don't belong to universal under contract for movies they belong to fox entertainment thats why the Avengers movie coming out in the near future wont feature any of those characters
i don't think the Marvel Theme Park is going to be on the radar for at least 10 years i think we could start seeing rides like The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man coming to current Disney parks like DHS
Wilt Dasney
Well-Known Member
I'm curious what you mean by Universal having the rights to those movies. The right to do what exactly? Spider-Man and Wolverine are already represented in IoA (one by way of a somewhat well known attraction, the other with a giant "cutout" just across the street).
If you mean the right to depict the movie versions of those characters in their parks, I guess I don't follow. The entire Marvel area of IoA is comic-based (no Hugh Jackman or Tobey Maguire, although if any theme park would have had the rights to those depictions, one would think it would have been Uni).
Also, is the implication that Disney could use a future Spider-Man for an attraction or a M&G in Florida, as long as it was specified that it was MOVIE Spider-Man and not the COMICS Spider-Man that IoA uses?
I hope this doesn't come off hectoring, but I'm really trying to make sense of what you're suggesting...and make sure I haven't missed a potentially big loophole in this Disney/Universal/Marvel drama!
I wish we knew the details of the contract Universal had with Marvel, so we could know how relevant Disney's ownership is for future re-ups. If it contains language that basically says Universal can have first dibs on the characters for all eternity barring some massive misuse of the properties, then Disney might be in the position of having no more power than rubber-stamping Universal's renewal.
On the other hand, if Marvel was given the right to review the arrangement from time to time and terminate the agreement for basically no good reason, then Disney's ownership *might* become much more important.
I say *might* because assuming Marvel still has the same top staff in place that it did prior to the merger, the long-time comics guys might not be too keen on Disney — with no real knowledge or appreciation of what they do — trying to tell them how to handle their own contracts. Basically, it might not be as simple as Bob Iger snatching back Spider-Man with a wicked laugh, if doing so would pi$$ off people with their own egos like Stan Lee or Joe Quesada (is he still running the show over at Marvel? He was back when I read comics).
Basically I'm still waiting to see what Disney "owning" Marvel really MEANS...whether the agreement stipulated that Disney would cash the checks and keep its nose (and lawyers) out of Marvel's well-established comics and licensing business, or whether the marriage will allow for Disney to take a more active role in Marvel's internal decisions.
So many questions about this arrangement, and I would love to have more details.
I'm curious what you mean by Universal having the rights to those movies. The right to do what exactly? Spider-Man and Wolverine are already represented in IoA (one by way of a somewhat well known attraction, the other with a giant "cutout" just across the street).
If you mean the right to depict the movie versions of those characters in their parks, I guess I don't follow. The entire Marvel area of IoA is comic-based (no Hugh Jackman or Tobey Maguire, although if any theme park would have had the rights to those depictions, one would think it would have been Uni).
Also, is the implication that Disney could use a future Spider-Man for an attraction or a M&G in Florida, as long as it was specified that it was MOVIE Spider-Man and not the COMICS Spider-Man that IoA uses?
I hope this doesn't come off hectoring, but I'm really trying to make sense of what you're suggesting...and make sure I haven't missed a potentially big loophole in this Disney/Universal/Marvel drama!
I wish we knew the details of the contract Universal had with Marvel, so we could know how relevant Disney's ownership is for future re-ups. If it contains language that basically says Universal can have first dibs on the characters for all eternity barring some massive misuse of the properties, then Disney might be in the position of having no more power than rubber-stamping Universal's renewal.
On the other hand, if Marvel was given the right to review the arrangement from time to time and terminate the agreement for basically no good reason, then Disney's ownership *might* become much more important.
I say *might* because assuming Marvel still has the same top staff in place that it did prior to the merger, the long-time comics guys might not be too keen on Disney — with no real knowledge or appreciation of what they do — trying to tell them how to handle their own contracts. Basically, it might not be as simple as Bob Iger snatching back Spider-Man with a wicked laugh, if doing so would pi$$ off people with their own egos like Stan Lee or Joe Quesada (is he still running the show over at Marvel? He was back when I read comics).
Basically I'm still waiting to see what Disney "owning" Marvel really MEANS...whether the agreement stipulated that Disney would cash the checks and keep its nose (and lawyers) out of Marvel's well-established comics and licensing business, or whether the marriage will allow for Disney to take a more active role in Marvel's internal decisions.
So many questions about this arrangement, and I would love to have more details.
we defiantly need more details