Pumbas Nakasak
Heading for the great escape.
He could have said solicitor
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Moving Marvel rides from Universal to Hollywood Studios?
- Thread starter twinnstar
- Start date
I know you were trying to be smart, but the legal definition of Fraud is not quite the same as the dictionary definition, since fraud is a specific act. Nice try, though.
Hold on...let me check my briefs!...Yep, still Fruit of the Loom.
aeroforce101
New Member
LMAO!!!:lol::lol::lol::lol:He might be onto something, I saw this while driving on I-4 today :ROFLOL:
wizards8507
Active Member
But fraud, in the legal sense, requires that the intent be for personal gain or to damage another person or party. The listener of this misinformation is not damaged in any way, and the Cast Member, acting on his own behalf and outside his capacity as an agent of the Walt Disney Company, could not possibly see any person gain from his actions.
Wouldn't the intention be disregarded if the final outcome were still the same? ie- a loss, either monetary or otherwise.
ie, CM A tells a guest some BS about an attraction, and the guest buys a vacation based on the CM's misinformation... that would be a monetary loss.
Or they start planning and waste their time when they find out the truth, that would be a nonmonetary loss.
However, I doubt a judge would award anything on either one. At least that's what my discussion with a few attorneys at work while reading this thread has told me.
But I'm quite certain that the CM would definitely be out of work if Disney were forced to send an attorney to court over this... or even to pay a settlement just to keep it out of court. That's what my experience dealing with the mouse has told me.
ie, CM A tells a guest some BS about an attraction, and the guest buys a vacation based on the CM's misinformation... that would be a monetary loss.
Or they start planning and waste their time when they find out the truth, that would be a nonmonetary loss.
However, I doubt a judge would award anything on either one. At least that's what my discussion with a few attorneys at work while reading this thread has told me.
But I'm quite certain that the CM would definitely be out of work if Disney were forced to send an attorney to court over this... or even to pay a settlement just to keep it out of court. That's what my experience dealing with the mouse has told me.
Hey Tom, how much do you have left to graduate? I'm working on my master's thesis right now, and working on my law school apps to start hopefully right after graduation.
JEANYLASER
Well-Known Member
I would like spiderman ride in Disney Hollywood Studios! It's a rumor and pretty good one I hope it's official!
WDWFigment
Well-Known Member
I graduated last year and started working full time in August (found out I passed the Bar in October). The job market out there (at least in the US) is atrocious for attorneys right now. BigLaw is laying off, implementing hiring freezes, and deferred hirings, and smaller firms aren't hiring, either. I doubt anyone else really cares about this, so PM me if you want to hear/read more.
Oh, no need... I know how bad things are in law right now. I have a guaranteed job if I go to law school and pass the PR and federal bars, so it's a no-brainer for me.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Do you actually read the threads? It's not a good rumor and nowhere near the truth. Besides, if Disney wanted something on the level of The Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man, they could have done so on their own years ago.
JEANYLASER
Well-Known Member
thanks for the info!
TRONorail10
Active Member
Frontline cast members typically only know factual details about future projects if it somehow relates to their area of work. Otherwise, Disney is very mum on future projects unless it is something simple like a ride refurbishment, which all CM's are usually informed of so that they can pass closure information onto guests. While I won't give away my specific work details, I was well aware of the Tomorrowland Terrace Noodle Station name and menu change last spring (even though it didn't go into effect until this past Thanksgiving). El Pirata Y El Perico was also supposed to receive a name and possible change in menu. Although, the last I heard is that it was being pushed back to Spring 2011 to coincide with release of POTC:4, the name is going to be "Tortuga Tavern."
PalisadesPkteer
Active Member
I was just wondering something.
Can Universal build additional new Marvel character based rides?
If they want to build a Wolverine ride can they?
Or because Disney owns the rights to characters does that mean Universal has no right to build more rides related to marvel?
So is Universal now stuck with the rides they have and no way to make more?
Can Universal build additional new Marvel character based rides?
If they want to build a Wolverine ride can they?
Or because Disney owns the rights to characters does that mean Universal has no right to build more rides related to marvel?
So is Universal now stuck with the rides they have and no way to make more?
wizards8507
Active Member
From The Orlando Sentinel:
Through a 15-year-old licensing contract between Marvel and an arm of NBC Universal — a contract Disney inherited when it bought Marvel — Universal Orlando is the only theme park on the U.S. East Coast that can use some of Marvel’s best-known characters, including Spider-Man, the Incredible Hulk and the X-Men.
In other words, Universal has a contract with Marvel for exclusive rights. Disney bought Marvel, so now Disney and Universal have the contract with each other.
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.
From Screamscape:
It’s just a rumor at this point, but more than one industry source has mentioned to me that Disney’s board may have been kicking around some options to quietly “buy out Universal” to get the theme park rights to the Marvel characters back and completely under Disney’s control, allowing them to get the most out of their new purchase. In a somewhat related move, Disney did buy out Paramount back in October for the rights to market and distribute The Avengers (May 2012) and Iron Man 3 (May 2013). (Note: Paramount will still retain control for the 2011 Marvel universe films: Thor & Captain America). Could Universal be the next ones invited to have a little chat with Iger?
Through a 15-year-old licensing contract between Marvel and an arm of NBC Universal — a contract Disney inherited when it bought Marvel — Universal Orlando is the only theme park on the U.S. East Coast that can use some of Marvel’s best-known characters, including Spider-Man, the Incredible Hulk and the X-Men.
In other words, Universal has a contract with Marvel for exclusive rights. Disney bought Marvel, so now Disney and Universal have the contract with each other.
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.
From Screamscape:
It’s just a rumor at this point, but more than one industry source has mentioned to me that Disney’s board may have been kicking around some options to quietly “buy out Universal” to get the theme park rights to the Marvel characters back and completely under Disney’s control, allowing them to get the most out of their new purchase. In a somewhat related move, Disney did buy out Paramount back in October for the rights to market and distribute The Avengers (May 2012) and Iron Man 3 (May 2013). (Note: Paramount will still retain control for the 2011 Marvel universe films: Thor & Captain America). Could Universal be the next ones invited to have a little chat with Iger?
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Disney already agreed that it would limit who sees information regarding Universal Orlando as part of getting approval from the feds to continue with the Marvel acquisition. The contract between Marvel and Universal Orlando was also posted here about a month ago.
The legal definition of fraud also requires that the "victim" relies on the misinformation and becuase of that suffers an injury. Would a reasonable person rely on such a statement by someone who is not in a position of apparrent authority? Not so much.
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Essentially, Universal has to keep the status quo with Marvel Super Hero Island. In theory they could negotiate for changes or additions to the area, but they would be negotiating with the enemy to do so.
For a while after the merger, Disney had employees at Islands of Adventure on a daily basis looking for signs of neglect that could result in Disney voiding some of the existing contracts. Evidently they have backed off that approach.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Not surprising, they do the same thing with the Oriental Land Company. Not to void the deal, but because all of that lavishness and detail is money paid to Disney with no chance of it ever going to any other companies.