Disney Can't Use Marvel Characters in the Parks, Right?

[Super Ninja]

I've seen several people reference ideas for bringing Marvel characters into the theme parks, but I think this has to be just plain unrealsitic. Unviersal obviously bought exclusive rights to use their characters. The only way I could see this happening is if Universal agreed to sell the rights back to Disney and void the contract. I just don't see this happening. After the Spiderman rehab, I'm going to guess this contract is probably for 50 years or something ridiculous. So I think it's probably right to assume this is not going to happen. I think Disney made the acquisition based mostly on films and merchandise sales, not for theme park attractions.

[medic9016]

Sure they can. That was part of the purshase of Marvel Entertainment Inc and intention all along.

[BrerGnat]

Sure they can. That was part of the purshase of Marvel Entertainment Inc and intention all along.

No, they can't. At least, not in the USA.

The Marvel Character license that Universal has where it pertains to theme park rides gave them exclusivity for U.S. theme parks only.

Disney can (and will likely) put some Marvel based rides in some of the international parks.

[Super Ninja]

Sure they can. That was part of the purshase of Marvel Entertainment Inc and intention all along.

But where's your evidence? That doesn't counter my point really.

Marvel made the contract with Universal before the merger. The merger with Disney happened afterwards, but it doesn't void the contract with Univeral. I'm pretty sure Universal would have not bought exclusive rights to develop a Marvel area at its park if it wasn't actually exclusive.

Similarly, you're not going to see J. K. Rowling suddenly allow Disney to develop Harry Potter attractions, because it would break Universal's pre-existing contract.

[Maleficent's Dad]

Apparently they can use the Marvel characters in their US parks, and they intend to do so. Iger announced it at the annual shareholder meeting.

Universal has the rights for attractions.

Read about it here.

[Super Ninja]

Apparently they can use the Marvel characters in their US parks, and they intend to do so. Iger announced it at the annual shareholder meeting.

Universal has the rights for attractions.

Read about it here.

I don't buy this really. What's the point of having characters without attractions? And what constitutes an attraction? A meet and greet is certainly an attraction I think. Personally, I think this will happen in the Asian and European parks. If they attempt something like that in the US, there will be a lawsuit and they will likely lose.

[Maleficent's Dad]

I don't buy this really. What's the point of having characters without attractions? And what constitutes an attraction? A meet and greet is certainly an attraction I think. Personally, I think this will happen in the Asian and European parks. If they attempt something like that in the US, there will be a lawsuit and they will likely lose.

Iger announced it to shareholders. So that should not be taken lightly.
Disney has an army of lawyers working for them. I don't think they'd introduce something, anything really, into a park without thought of legal ramifications. As for characters without an attraction - Pinocchio, Aurora, Hercules, and Pocahontas come to mind. They all have meet & greets. And no, I do not consider a meet & greet an attraction.

[Maleficent's Dad]

Similarly, you're not going to see J. K. Rowling suddenly allow Disney to develop Harry Potter attractions, because it would break Universal's pre-existing contract.

Universal's contract for the Harry Potter theme has serious restrictions. The agreement extends for a certain area only (something like a 200 mile radius from Universal Orlando, although I don't have the exact specs in front of me). In other words, if Disney forked over the money, they *could* work a contract for a Harry Potter, in, let's say, Baltimore, MD.

Do I see it happening? Never.
Could it? Yes.

[Super Ninja]

Iger announced it to shareholders. So that should not be taken lightly.
Disney has an army of lawyers working for them. I don't think they'd introduce something, anything really, into a park without thought of legal ramifications. As for characters without an attraction - Pinocchio, Aurora, Hercules, and Pocahontas come to mind. They all have meet & greets. And no, I do not consider a meet & greet an attraction.

You didn't read the article closely enough. You missed the most important part actually:

Iger didn't mention which Disney park might get an infusion of spandex-clad heroes.

I guarantee you he's talking about the parks in Shanghai and elsewhere.

And no, I do not consider a meet & greet an attraction.

It obviously is though. That's like arguing that a parade or a fireworks show isn't an attraction. So I'm going to say you're wrong on this one. Universal wouldn't agree to some contract with such a huge loop hole that another company could walk right through.

[Maleficent's Dad]

My last post on the topic:
Iger announced this to US Shareholders talking about his US Parks. His entire address is online if you care to read it.

Perhaps you're right. I was just trying to answer your original question. Since the thread you started was a question, I tried to contribute constructively. Apparently you don't care for the factual information that I presented.

To be honest, Marvel characters don't appeal to my family or me, so I couldn't really care less if they do or do not appear in the parks.

[Super Ninja]

Iger announced this to US Shareholders talking about his US Parks. His entire address is online if you care to read it.

You're going to have to pull out a quote that says he's only talking about US parks. The
article you references makes no such distinction. In fact, it points out that lack of distinction.

The fact that they're US shareholders is irrelevant. If Apple, for example, makes a lot of money selling computers to China, the US shareholders still benefit from that success.

I tried to contribute constructively. Apparently you don't care for the factual information that I presented.

You presented information as facts that are not backed up by the evidence you presented really. If something can't be proven and is actually contradicted by other established facts, then it's probably not true. I think nuance matters here. Iger's lack of specificity says something in itself.

[Polynesian Dweller]

It's a bit more complex than people are thinking. Universal has exclusive use, east of the Mississippi, to the Marvel characters they are using in their park. As soon as they stop using them then they lose their rights. They do not have exclusive rights west of the Mississippi. Sounds strange but that was how the contract with Marvel was written and it remains in force.

So, in Orlando Disney could use any characters not in use in Universal parks. West of the Mississippi they can use ny character in DL.

[TinkerbellT421]

Just something I found interesting:

"One of Universal Orlando's best attractions is Marvel Super Hero Island at Islands of Adventure, directly across town from Walt Disney World. The Island includes an Incredible Hulk roller-coaster, Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man simulator ride as well as character appearances by Wolverine, Captain America, Hulk and others. Universal Studios Hollywood ended its relationship with Marvel back in 2007, which put an end to the Marvel Heroes stage show, themed restaurant and similar walk-around characters. However, Universal Studios Japan also has a Spider-Man themed simulator ride; of which the rights are a long way off from expiring"

According to this, Universal ended it's relationship with Marvel in 2007. So wouldn't that mean it "ended"?

[MickeysBestPal]

Universal Studios Hollywood
ended its relationship with Marvel back in 2007...

According to this, Universal ended it's relationship with Marvel in 2007.
So wouldn't that mean it "ended"?

Not "Universal" (in general.)

The info only concerns "Universal Studios HOLLYWOOD."

That means that Disney CAN use the Marvel Super Heroes in DISNEYLAND as soon as they'd like.

But, Disney can not use the ones still associated with "Universal Studios ORLANDO at WDW.

[TinkerbellT421]

Not "Universal Studios" (in general.)

The info only concerns "Universal Studios HOLLYWOOD."

That means that Disney CAN use the Marvel Super Heroes in DISNEYLAND as soon as they'd like.

But, Disney can not use the ones still associated with "Universal Studios ORLANDO at WDW.

AH ha! Makes sense. Never really looked too much into the whole Marvel thing after I heard they bought it, it's interesting to see the technicalities involved. I guess it's a big thing for most people, but not for me so never really was to interested in it that much. Thanks for the info.

[BrerGnat]

Almost IMMEDIATELY after that merger, DisneyLAND in California began selling Marvel character merchandise in several locations, primarily in the toy store in DCA. I bought my son a Spiderman toy there almost 2 years ago.

I can't remember if they are selling this type of stuff at WDW or not.

From what I understand, Universal Studios ORLANDO has the character exclusivity for theme park RIDES only. So, Disney World could not build a Spiderman RIDE, but they could have a Spiderman meet and greet.

However, DisneyLAND resort could, theoretically, build a Spiderman Ride.

It needs to be said, though, that in the shareholder meeting, Iger used the phrase "Disney parks worldwide" when he was referencing Marvel based attractions in Disney parks. He did NOT say "U.S. theme parks."

[Bay Lake]

Almost IMMEDIATELY after that merger, DisneyLAND in California began selling Marvel character merchandise in several locations, primarily in the toy store in DCA. I bought my son a Spiderman toy there almost 2 years ago.

I can't remember if they are selling this type of stuff at WDW or not.

From what I understand, Universal Studios ORLANDO has the character exclusivity for theme park RIDES only. So, Disney World could not build a Spiderman RIDE, but they could have a Spiderman meet and greet.

However, DisneyLAND resort could, theoretically, build a Spiderman Ride.

It needs to be said, though, that in the shareholder meeting, Iger used the phrase "Disney parks worldwide" when he was referencing Marvel based attractions in Disney parks. He did NOT say "U.S. theme parks."

I saw Spiderman and Iron MAn hats and shirts in Epcot stores last week

[Polynesian Dweller]

Universal Hollywood did not renew rights to Marvel characters in 2007 so west of the Mississippi Disney can do whatever it wants.

In Orlando, Disney cannot directly compete with rides or restaurants. The Universal contract is apparently very narrow. They can only use characters they have already used and cannot add any characters without Marvel's permission. The contract apparently does nit grant exvlusivity on merchandise. So Disney can use any remaining characters is rides east of the Mississippi and is free to sell merchandise anywhere.

[azcavalier]

Almost IMMEDIATELY after that merger, DisneyLAND in California began selling Marvel character merchandise in several locations, primarily in the toy store in DCA. I bought my son a Spiderman toy there almost 2 years ago.

I can't remember if they are selling this type of stuff at WDW or not.

From what I understand, Universal Studios ORLANDO has the character exclusivity for theme park RIDES only. So, Disney World could not build a Spiderman RIDE, but they could have a Spiderman meet and greet.

However, DisneyLAND resort could, theoretically, build a Spiderman Ride.

It needs to be said, though, that in the shareholder meeting, Iger used the phrase "Disney parks worldwide" when he was referencing Marvel based attractions in Disney parks. He did NOT say "U.S. theme parks."

Yep, the merchandise for various Marvel characters has been on sale at WDW for a while now. I saw a bunch of Iron Man merchandise for sale in Hollywood studios.

[NJGIRL]

It's a bit more complex than people are thinking. Universal has exclusive use, east of the Mississippi, to the Marvel characters they are using in their park. As soon as they stop using them then they lose their rights. They do not have exclusive rights west of the Mississippi. Sounds strange but that was how the contract with Marvel was written and it remains in force.

So, in Orlando Disney could use any characters not in use in Universal parks. West of the Mississippi they can use ny character in DL.

This is exactly what I remember reading when it first happened a couple of years ago. Universal holds the rights to certain characters indefinately (as long as they want them) and Disney CAN NOT use those characters east of the Mississippi as long as Universal is using them, no if's and's or but's. You may see other marvel character's that Universal doesn't hold the rights to in Disney theme parks east of the Mississippi. Remember there are from what I remember hundreds of Marvel characters and Universal doesn't own the rights to all of them, but they do own the rights to some that are not in use at the theme parks at present.

Disney can not force Universal to give up the rights and they know this or it would have been done a long time ago. I beleive Disney bought the rights to the Marvel characters for the movie aspect (they don't even own all of those), but that is just my guess.