Monorail to be wrapped once again

WDW1974

Well-Known Member
Just a quick post before I head out for the day (you awake yet, Lee?) ... but there are already legal issues with Disney's wrapping of the monorail because again as we all -- even JT -- understand, Disney has no rights to use UNI's Marvel characters in any/all parks east of the Mississippi in perpetuity.

Well, UNI Legal contacted Disney and threatened a major legal action and informed them that this was a breach of contract and that the monorail couldn't run. Disney Legal responded that the contract only covered use in theme parks and the 'rails are transportation.

They are still going back and forth, but it was made very clear to Disney that they could not, would not be allowed to run the wrapped train in EPCOT because that IS a theme park ... and UNI is still not happy with it running at all with images of the Hulk on the side. So, it will be interesting to see just what happens.

~Some of us DO know what is going on ... and we don't wear spandex either!~
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Just a quick post before I head out for the day (you awake yet, Lee?) ... but there are already legal issues with Disney's wrapping of the monorail because again as we all -- even JT -- understand, Disney has no rights to use UNI's Marvel characters in any/all parks east of the Mississippi in perpetuity.

Well, UNI Legal contacted Disney and threatened a major legal action and informed them that this was a breach of contract and that the monorail couldn't run. Disney Legal responded that the contract only covered use in theme parks and the 'rails are transportation.

They are still going back and forth, but it was made very clear to Disney that they could not, would not be allowed to run the wrapped train in EPCOT because that IS a theme park ... and UNI is still not happy with it running at all with images of the Hulk on the side. So, it will be interesting to see just what happens.

~Some of us DO know what is going on ... and we don't wear spandex either!~
I really think Universal needs to sue. Disney sells all of Walt Disney World as a theme park experience. Universal needs to have the limits of their exclusivity more clearly defined by a court. What if Disney added a Marvel experience to Downtown Disney or even Flamingo Crossing? Is that okay since it is not a theme park per se but clearly in the same vien? Universal would be in for a world of hurt if they do not protect their exclusivity in which they continue to invest.
 

Megavolt

Member
Inside the Magic posted some pictures and a video of the finished wrap.

http://www./2012/03/first-look-the-...sney-world-on-the-magic-kingdom-express-line/
 

jt04

Well-Known Member
Just a quick post before I head out for the day (you awake yet, Lee?) ... but there are already legal issues with Disney's wrapping of the monorail because again as we all -- even JT -- understand, Disney has no rights to use UNI's Marvel characters in any/all parks east of the Mississippi in perpetuity.

Well, UNI Legal contacted Disney and threatened a major legal action and informed them that this was a breach of contract and that the monorail couldn't run. Disney Legal responded that the contract only covered use in theme parks and the 'rails are transportation.

They are still going back and forth, but it was made very clear to Disney that they could not, would not be allowed to run the wrapped train in EPCOT because that IS a theme park ... and UNI is still not happy with it running at all with images of the Hulk on the side. So, it will be interesting to see just what happens.

~Some of us DO know what is going on ... and we don't wear spandex either!~

Sounds like someone made a crank call to Disney legal. :lol:
 

71jason

Well-Known Member
Just a quick post before I head out for the day (you awake yet, Lee?) ... but there are already legal issues with Disney's wrapping of the monorail because again as we all -- even JT -- understand, Disney has no rights to use UNI's Marvel characters in any/all parks east of the Mississippi in perpetuity.

Well, UNI Legal contacted Disney and threatened a major legal action and informed them that this was a breach of contract and that the monorail couldn't run. Disney Legal responded that the contract only covered use in theme parks and the 'rails are transportation.

They are still going back and forth, but it was made very clear to Disney that they could not, would not be allowed to run the wrapped train in EPCOT because that IS a theme park ... and UNI is still not happy with it running at all with images of the Hulk on the side. So, it will be interesting to see just what happens.

~Some of us DO know what is going on ... and we don't wear spandex either!~


Since I first heard about this I wondered if it was a trial balloon (no pun intended) to get Universal into court to hash out some legal issues. The Avenger-orail is perfect in that would force Uni to show their hand re: the two key issues that don't seem clear in the contract:

(1) What is a "theme park"? (I think DTD/DisneyQuest would be the more interesting question, but if the MK monorail line is part of a park, pretty much anything on WDW property can be ruled out.)

(2) Is Iron Man covered under the agreement? The one remaining marketable Marvel character IoA doesn't use, does he fall under "the Avengers clause"?

At the end of the day it's a lot cheaper to wrap the monorail than to rebrand DQ as "Stark Industries." Do the cheap thing, feel out what the courts will make of the contract.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Since I first heard about this I wondered if it was a trial balloon (no pun intended) to get Universal into court to hash out some legal issues. The Avenger-orail is perfect in that would force Uni to show their hand re: the two key issues that don't seem clear in the contract:

(1) What is a "theme park"? (I think DTD/DisneyQuest would be the more interesting question, but if the MK monorail line is part of a park, pretty much anything on WDW property can be ruled out.)

(2) Is Iron Man covered under the agreement? The one remaining marketable Marvel character IoA doesn't use, does he fall under "the Avengers clause"?

At the end of the day it's a lot cheaper to wrap the monorail than to rebrand DQ as "Stark Industries." Do the cheap thing, feel out what the courts will make of the contract.
I agree and think Point 1 does need to be out.

On Point 2 Iron Man should be out because he is part of the Avengers family of characters. Universal retains the rights to the entire family of characters in use and the Avengers are even used as an example.
 

Skippy

Well-Known Member
Inside the Magic posted some pictures and a video of the finished wrap.

http://www./2012/03/first-look-the-...sney-world-on-the-magic-kingdom-express-line/

Ick. I try not to nitpick about debatable aesthetic choices, but seeing this as I'm leaving the Magic Kingdom would take me out of the magic a little. It screams run of the mill advertisement much more than the Tronorail in my opinion.

Since I first heard about this I wondered if it was a trial balloon (no pun intended) to get Universal into court to hash out some legal issues.

Now that's an interesting thought.
 

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
I don't mind the wraps as long as only one of the 12 monorails is wrapped. I don't think the new wrap looks that bad. It'll be interesting to see what UNI does, though, and honestly, I'm rooting for them.
 

71jason

Well-Known Member
On Point 2 Iron Man should be out because he is part of the Avengers family of characters. Universal retains the rights to the entire family of characters in use and the Avengers are even used as an example.

I agree Shellhead has been an Avenger since issue #1, and probably second to Cap as the most consistent member. That said, virtually every Marvel character has been an Avenger at some point in the past 50 years. Maybe Disney can argue the rights only apply if marketed as a team (weak, but Ive heard of weaker arguments). Or maybe some sort of sleeping on their rights claim. Who knows what the lawyers have up their sleeve, but again, it's better to hash this out over a monorail cover rather than the financial equivalent of an E-ticket.

The wrap could easily have been for "Brave" and we wouldn't be having this conversation. They had to know this was going to be an issue.
 

celluloid

Well-Known Member
Si

(2) Is Iron Man covered under the agreement? The one remaining marketable Marvel character IoA doesn't use, does he fall under "the Avengers clause"?

At the end of the day it's a lot cheaper to wrap the monorail than to rebrand DQ as "Stark Industries." Do the cheap thing, feel out what the courts will make of the contract.

Yes, Iron Man is covered because any character featured or represented on Marvel Superhero Island is a part of that agreement. Iron Man as well as Stark Industries are featured multiple times in various places around that area of the park.
 

rct247

Well-Known Member
I'm not really a fan that it is a wrap and an advertisement, but I think for what it is, it does look pretty good.

I do have to say my favorite part is the front and rear of the monorail trains. They are all black and look very sleek, new, and almost more futuristic!
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I agree Shellhead has been an Avenger since issue #1, and probably second to Cap as the most consistent member. That said, virtually every Marvel character has been an Avenger at some point in the past 50 years. Maybe Disney can argue the rights only apply if marketed as a team (weak, but Ive heard of weaker arguments). Or maybe some sort of sleeping on their rights claim. Who knows what the lawyers have up their sleeve, but again, it's better to hash this out over a monorail cover rather than the financial equivalent of an E-ticket.

The wrap could easily have been for "Brave" and we wouldn't be having this conversation. They had to know this was going to be an issue.
Marvel Agreement Between MCA Inc. and Marvel Entertainment Group said:
IV. Exclusivity
B. 1. a. 1. i. East of The Mississippi - any other theme park is limited to using characters not currently being used by MCA at the time such other license is granted. [For purpose of this subsection and subsection iv, a character is “being used by MCA” if (x)__it or another character of the same “family” (e.g., any member of THE FANTASTIC FOUR, THE AVENGERS or villains associated with a hero being used) is more than an incidental element of an attraction, is presented as a costumed character, or is more than an incidental element of the theming of a retail store or food facility; and, (y)__in addition, if such character or another character from the same “family” is an element in any MCA marketing during the previous year. Any character who is only used as a costume character will not be considered to be “being used by MCA” unless it appears as more than an incidental element in MCA’s marketing.]

That seems like that would be a very tough argument.

I think another piece of evidence that this might well be a means of testing the legal waters is time. The "Tronorail" debuted on March 19, 2010 and TRON: Legacy opened December 17, 2010. That's just shy of nine months! The "Avengerail" debuts today, March 31, 2012, and the film opens in just over a month on May 4, 2012. How long would it take for Universal to file with the appropriate court and get an injunction?
 

aladdin2007

Well-Known Member
What I dont like more than anything is you cant see out the windows when they do this and its mega annoying.

Other than that this could be really great IF it had been a Disneyfied property, sorry but avengers/marvel are not Disney to me and dont belong on the monerail, yet franchised obsessed Iger is determined to fill the parks with this stuff I think down the road. Just think how cool these wraps would have been for say The Lion King, or one of the other more recent or classic features. Still a moving billboard yes, but at least they would have been Disneyfied. This looks like anything but Disney like. The tron wrap worked because of Epcot etc, but this where does this fit in? It doesnt.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
What I dont like more than anything is you cant see out the windows when they do this and its mega annoying.

Other than that this could be really great IF it had been a Disneyfied property, sorry but avengers/marvel are not Disney to me and dont belong on the monerail, yet franchised obsessed Iger is determined to fill the parks with this stuff I think down the road. Just think how cool these wraps would have been for say The Lion King, or one of the other more recent or classic features. Still a moving billboard yes, but at least they would have been Disneyfied. This looks like anything but Disney like. The tron wrap worked because of Epcot etc, but this where does this fit in? It doesnt.
How are the monorails themselves, with their distinctive Imagineering designed look, not "Disney?"
 

jjharvpro

Active Member
I may be in the minority, but I really like the look of it. Although this may seem strange walking out of MK, it's sleek and smooth and looks really nice. Here we go ladies and gents, besides merchandise, this is the very first Marvel presence in Disney Parks. This is only the beginning.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom