Guardians of the Galaxy Disney Attraction?

[SeventyOne]

I knew that when the rumor came from @Marni1971. And Spirit. And Lee.

I have respect for all three (tbh, Spirit and Parentsof4 only reasons I venture to WDWTragic). But at least two of the three were hoodwinked by Universal's "plumbers" back before Transformers. Ditto re: placement of DHS Star Wars Land (tho I think that may have been a legit change in plans v. attempt to find leaks).

When it's the silly season for rumors and previously credible sources are citing different variations on a theme, I think it's reasonable to question if information is being deliberately leaked to catch the leakers.

 

[Nick]

I have respect for all three (tbh, Spirit and Parentsof4 only reasons I venture to WDWTragic). But at least two of the three were hoodwinked by Universal's "plumbers" back before Transformers. Ditto re: placement of DHS Star Wars Land (tho I think that may have been a legit change in plans v. attempt to find leaks).

When it's the silly season for rumors and previously credible sources are citing different variations on a theme, I think it's reasonable to question if information is being deliberately leaked to catch the leakers.

lol, the two people you mentioned I can't stand. Po4at least has good stats, but gets so freakin' cocky. And I just can't with Spirit. I don't need to know his whole life stories or his stupid qualms with people. I like that he gives info, but his arrogance was enough that I legit muted him. He had about 5-6 different threads going and it was just getting to the point of spam. It really helps clear the News & Rumor section for me since I have no use for those.

 

[Brian G.]

Well-warranted, but I think people also get it in their head that anything Marvel is an absolute no-go, when in reality, the line is really, really blurred on GOTG (I've read the article OU did and still don't see anything restricting Disney). A non-Marvel Branded land (meaning not using the word, font or logo of "MARVEL") is very possible imo with GOTG/Big Hero 6.

Even if there is a restriction, there's also the possibility of contract re-negotiation to benefit both sides, which most don't consider. Just saying.

I agree it's very blurred about their usage.

What we do know that is concrete though is that, like you said, they cannon use the name "Marvel"; and they cannot advertise it within 300 miles of Orlando unless it's a national buys - which seems pretty pointless to do something in Florida with those restrictions.

Now this is my interpretation of this part of the contract:

To the extent and in the territories that MCA has exclusive theme park rights, such shall not prohibit (except for the limitations described below) Marvel from itself developing or licensing its planned Retail concept which may include interactive elements as a major or minor element (presently intended to be called “The Marvel Action Universe” and referred to as such herein, but which may also be called “The Marvel Universe” or another name chosen by Marvel). ​

Since Disney now owns Marvel, this restricts them. "The Marvel Action Universe" was essentially a placeholder name. I know it says Retail concept, but the following paragraph makes clear of one thing:

Mini-theme parks, recreation centers, game centers and the like designated with the Marvel name or the name of any Marvel characters or any major entertainment component of a Marvel Action Universe such as a motion based film ride shall not be within 60 miles of any Universal Theme Park with a THE MARVEL UNIVERSE.

No The Marvel Action Universe shall be in or marketed in conjunction with any themed entertainment areas owned, operated or marketed by Disney, Time-Warner, Six Flags, Sony, Paramount or Busch. As used herein, “theme park” and “themed entertainment areas” shall not include, inter alia, facilities or complexes where at least 70% of the revenues generated on the premises are derived from retail sales or whose primary source of revenue is lodging (which may include food, beverage and gaming revenues).
​

Basically, Marvel, under the now ownership of Disney, can open a store. Anything else cannot be added. It's not a matter of GotG rights being used, it's a matter of a Marvel property being used so close to IOA. Which is why Guardians usage in WDW has been able to jump thru a bit more loopholes.

Unless an agreement was made, which I have heard has not, Universal can use the above 2 passages and have a legitimate gripe/case.

 

[Nick]

I agree it's very blurred about their usage.

What we do know that is concrete though is that, like you said, they cannon use the name "Marvel"; and they cannot advertise it within 300 miles of Orlando unless it's a national buys - which seems pretty pointless to do something in Florida with those restrictions.

Now this is my interpretation of this part of the contract:

To the extent and in the territories that MCA has exclusive theme park rights, such shall not prohibit (except for the limitations described below) Marvel from itself developing or licensing its planned Retail concept which may include interactive elements as a major or minor element (presently intended to be called “The Marvel Action Universe” and referred to as such herein, but which may also be called “The Marvel Universe” or another name chosen by Marvel). ​

Since Disney now owns Marvel, this restricts them. "The Marvel Action Universe" was essentially a placeholder name. I know it says Retail concept, but the following paragraph makes clear of one thing:

Mini-theme parks, recreation centers, game centers and the like designated with the Marvel name or the name of any Marvel characters or any major entertainment component of a Marvel Action Universe such as a motion based film ride shall not be within 60 miles of any Universal Theme Park with a THE MARVEL UNIVERSE.

No The Marvel Action Universe shall be in or marketed in conjunction with any themed entertainment areas owned, operated or marketed by Disney, Time-Warner, Six Flags, Sony, Paramount or Busch. As used herein, “theme park” and “themed entertainment areas” shall not include, inter alia, facilities or complexes where at least 70% of the revenues generated on the premises are derived from retail sales or whose primary source of revenue is lodging (which may include food, beverage and gaming revenues).
​

Basically, Marvel, under the now ownership of Disney, can open a store. Anything else cannot be added. It's not a matter of GotG rights being used, it's a matter of a Marvel property being used so close to IOA. Which is why Guardians usage in WDW has been able to jump thru a bit more loopholes.

Unless an agreement was made, which I have heard has not, Universal can use the above 2 passages and have a legitimate gripe/case.

Say Disney does a GOTG attraction and named it Chris Pratt: The Ride (Just humor me ). Chris Pratt is obviously in this ride.... along with the rest of the Guardians. But they haven't said MARVEL. Is it really breaking that part of the contract if it's not explicitly titled or advertised as Marvel?

As to the Marvel Action Universe... this is where I feel like Universal has the most room to argue and likely win. I do think there is ways around it though.

 

[SeventyOne]

[Excellent post by @BriMan redacted for space]

I think the Marvel Action Universe is a red herring. It's a very specific retail outlet that never got off the ground. And while this is certainly up for debate, I think an argument can be made it was the intent of the parties to limit all provisions of that contract--including MAU ones--to the four main families. In other words, WDW could build "GotG Action Universe" if they wanted.

The "Marvel" name is potentially a real issue--could cause confusion with "Marvel Super Hero Island"--but the easiest way would be to just call the new attraction "Energy Ride --- featuring the Guardians of the Galaxy." I think @NextBigThing is right, without the explicit word "Marvel," there's no real room for confusion with the four families Universal has rights to.

But again, I'm certain no one who drafted this even considered the possibility Disney would have the rights to Marvel characters, or that anyone other than Hulk or Spidey would ever be seriously considered for a theme park attraction. This contract was clearly written with an eye toward Downtown Disney and a potential Six Flags Orlando/Tampa/Daytona, not EPCOT. Lawyers get paid $500 an hour to argue over these things because there isn't one cut-and-dried correct answer.

 

[Ultranel]

I'm not sure why Disney try so hard to bring Marvel to Orlando when they know they can't by law... looking for " *** " in the contract to somehow bring GOTG to WDW will just end up in court hearings and so on. Which it will take a long time so, that sound to me like a Epcot's GOTG opening Summer 2025. Now in the other hand if I was Universal I would release that contract in no time to Disney... at a price, of course! and this is how I would price it: Full construction cost of UO's 3rd gate plans + full re-theming construction cost of MSHI at IOA. Let see how much they truly want that contract in their control... if not, then they should start thinking about something else for UoE.

 

[DoubleJ]

I agree it's very blurred about their usage.

What we do know that is concrete though is that, like you said, they cannon use the name "Marvel"; and they cannot advertise it within 300 miles of Orlando unless it's a national buys - which seems pretty pointless to do something in Florida with those restrictions.

Now this is my interpretation of this part of the contract:

To the extent and in the territories that MCA has exclusive theme park rights, such shall not prohibit (except for the limitations described below) Marvel from itself developing or licensing its planned Retail concept which may include interactive elements as a major or minor element (presently intended to be called “The Marvel Action Universe” and referred to as such herein, but which may also be called “The Marvel Universe” or another name chosen by Marvel). ​

Since Disney now owns Marvel, this restricts them. "The Marvel Action Universe" was essentially a placeholder name. I know it says Retail concept, but the following paragraph makes clear of one thing:

Mini-theme parks, recreation centers, game centers and the like designated with the Marvel name or the name of any Marvel characters or any major entertainment component of a Marvel Action Universe such as a motion based film ride shall not be within 60 miles of any Universal Theme Park with a THE MARVEL UNIVERSE.

No The Marvel Action Universe shall be in or marketed in conjunction with any themed entertainment areas owned, operated or marketed by Disney, Time-Warner, Six Flags, Sony, Paramount or Busch. As used herein, “theme park” and “themed entertainment areas” shall not include, inter alia, facilities or complexes where at least 70% of the revenues generated on the premises are derived from retail sales or whose primary source of revenue is lodging (which may include food, beverage and gaming revenues).
​

Basically, Marvel, under the now ownership of Disney, can open a store. Anything else cannot be added. It's not a matter of GotG rights being used, it's a matter of a Marvel property being used so close to IOA. Which is why Guardians usage in WDW has been able to jump thru a bit more loopholes.

Unless an agreement was made, which I have heard has not, Universal can use the above 2 passages and have a legitimate gripe/case.

Actually, Disney for certain can't open a Marvel store at WDW.

The Marvel Action Universe will not be within 60 miles of any Universal Theme Park with a THE MARVEL UNIVERSE

Further, the contract makes it quite clear, that for all intents and purposes the Marvel Action Universe consists of: the sale of comic books, trading cards, software, licensed or Marvel produced merchandise, the use of electronic games and/or pinballs or other coin operated games, and may include one or more virtual reality and/or simulator ride using Marvel characters or other themes.

Any restrictions that mention the placement of a Marvel Action Universe, is a restriction on what it is, a retail concept, not what it could be. This makes that quite clear: No The Marvel Action Universe will be marketed so as to infer or imply that such THE MARVEL ACTION UNIVERSE or one of its components (x) constitutes a theme park or (y) is a component of a theme park

The words marketed, infer, and imply make it clear that the Marvel Action Universe is NOT x or y.

Therefore, the only restrictions that bind Disney's hands for their Epcot plans are:
East or West of The Mississippi – permitted uses shall be limited to the use of specific Marvel characters and Marvel may not permit a licensee to use the name “Marvel” as part of the attraction name or marketing

Obviously easy ways around that. Just don't have the name "Marvel". They could call it Superhero Mega Land if they wanted, just as long as it didn't have "Marvel".

And...

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;

This is the only thing that restricts Marvel from licensing other characters. GOTG is the only family of Marvel characters that is not used at all in Universal, therefore it is free for Marvel to license them to another theme park (obviously Disney in this case).

 

[Galaxy Defender]

Actually, Disney for certain can't open a Marvel store at WDW.

The Marvel Action Universe will not be within 60 miles of any Universal Theme Park with a THE MARVEL UNIVERSE

Further, the contract makes it quite clear, that for all intents and purposes the Marvel Action Universe consists of: the sale of comic books, trading cards, software, licensed or Marvel produced merchandise, the use of electronic games and/or pinballs or other coin operated games, and may include one or more virtual reality and/or simulator ride using Marvel characters or other themes.

Any restrictions that mention the placement of a Marvel Action Universe, is a restriction on what it is, a retail concept, not what it could be. This makes that quite clear: No The Marvel Action Universe will be marketed so as to infer or imply that such THE MARVEL ACTION UNIVERSE or one of its components (x) constitutes a theme park or (y) is a component of a theme park

The words marketed, infer, and imply make it clear that the Marvel Action Universe is NOT x or y.

Therefore, the only restrictions that bind Disney's hands for their Epcot plans are:
East or West of The Mississippi – permitted uses shall be limited to the use of specific Marvel characters and Marvel may not permit a licensee to use the name “Marvel” as part of the attraction name or marketing

Obviously easy ways around that. Just don't have the name "Marvel". They could call it Superhero Mega Land if they wanted, just as long as it didn't have "Marvel".

And...

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;

This is the only thing that restricts Marvel from licensing other characters. GOTG is the only family of Marvel characters that is not used at all in Universal, therefore it is free for Marvel to license them to another theme park (obviously Disney in this case).

There was/is a superhero headquarters store at Disney Springs. They just left Marvel out of the name.
Marvel mania comes to Downtown Disney with Super Hero Headquarters store opening | Inside the Magic

 

[DoubleJ]

There was/is a superhero headquarters store at Disney Springs. They just left Marvel out of the name.
Marvel mania comes to Downtown Disney with Super Hero Headquarters store opening | Inside the Magic

Well they could do that I suppose, just as long as there was no Marvel in the name. In fact, that pretty much null and voids any restriction of the "Marvel Action Universe" concept so long as it doesn't have "Marvel".

 

[Scott W.]

I'm not sure why Disney try so hard to bring Marvel to Orlando when they know they can't by law... looking for " *** " in the contract to somehow bring GOTG to WDW will just end up in court hearings and so on. Which it will take a long time so, that sound to me like a Epcot's GOTG opening Summer 2025. Now in the other hand if I was Universal I would release that contract in no time to Disney... at a price, of course! and this is how I would price it: Full construction cost of UO's 3rd gate plans + full re-theming construction cost of MSHI at IOA. Let see how much they truly want that contract in their control... if not, then they should start thinking about something else for UoE.

I can't put a figure on the price but it would be a crazy figure. I think asking them to pay for the 3rd gate is a bit unrealistic but asking them to pay for the replacement for MSHI isn't plus the lost income from the land being closed. I'd love to see what Universal could do with a Disney budget.

Actually, Disney for certain can't open a Marvel store at WDW.

The Marvel Action Universe will not be within 60 miles of any Universal Theme Park with a THE MARVEL UNIVERSE

Further, the contract makes it quite clear, that for all intents and purposes the Marvel Action Universe consists of: the sale of comic books, trading cards, software, licensed or Marvel produced merchandise, the use of electronic games and/or pinballs or other coin operated games, and may include one or more virtual reality and/or simulator ride using Marvel characters or other themes.

Any restrictions that mention the placement of a Marvel Action Universe, is a restriction on what it is, a retail concept, not what it could be. This makes that quite clear: No The Marvel Action Universe will be marketed so as to infer or imply that such THE MARVEL ACTION UNIVERSE or one of its components (x) constitutes a theme park or (y) is a component of a theme park

The words marketed, infer, and imply make it clear that the Marvel Action Universe is NOT x or y.

Therefore, the only restrictions that bind Disney's hands for their Epcot plans are:
East or West of The Mississippi – permitted uses shall be limited to the use of specific Marvel characters and Marvel may not permit a licensee to use the name “Marvel” as part of the attraction name or marketing

Obviously easy ways around that. Just don't have the name "Marvel". They could call it Superhero Mega Land if they wanted, just as long as it didn't have "Marvel".

And...

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;

This is the only thing that restricts Marvel from licensing other characters. GOTG is the only family of Marvel characters that is not used at all in Universal, therefore it is free for Marvel to license them to another theme park (obviously Disney in this case).

Is GOTG part of the Avengers family?

 

[AlexanderMBush]

I can't put a figure on the price but it would be a crazy figure. I think asking them to pay for the 3rd gate is a bit unrealistic but asking them to pay for the replacement for MSHI isn't plus the lost income from the land being closed. I'd love to see what Universal could do with a Disney budget.



Is GOTG part of the Avengers family?

MCU wise, they will be technically with the Avengers family when Infinity War happens (2018-2019). Comic Book wise, they have already.

 

[Scott W.]

MCU wise, they will be technically with the Avengers family when Infinity War happens (2018-2019). Comic Book wise, they have already.

Wouldn't that also rule some of the characters out of a proposed ride?

I don't think the MCU really matters to the contract since it was written before it and the majority of the Marvel films.

 

[AlexanderMBush]

Wouldn't that also rule some of the characters out of a proposed ride?

I don't think the MCU really matters to the contract since it was written before it and the majority of the Marvel films.

I believe when the MCU was starting to boom in 2010; they had to revise the contract. I can be wrong, but I think it was around that time that they included the MCU into the contract.

And yes, characters would be ruled out.

 

[brianlo]

I'm not sure why Disney try so hard to bring Marvel to Orlando when they know they can't by law... looking for " *** " in the contract to somehow bring GOTG to WDW will just end up in court hearings and so on. Which it will take a long time so, that sound to me like a Epcot's GOTG opening Summer 2025. Now in the other hand if I was Universal I would release that contract in no time to Disney... at a price, of course! and this is how I would price it: Full construction cost of UO's 3rd gate plans + full re-theming construction cost of MSHI at IOA. Let see how much they truly want that contract in their control... if not, then they should start thinking about something else for UoE.

I know you are being facetious, but you are talking about roughly a 4 billion dollar exchange for WDW to build a GoTG ride...

Disney bought Marvel for 4 billion.... the value of the theme park rights in Florida are a fraction of a fraction of that.

If this is built, it will be well within Disney's rights and will (and already likely has been) clarified between closed doors between both parties. No "Marvel" branding, no reference to Avengers, no Marvel villains. Just GoTG in an original attraction. No money exchanging hands needed.

Disney and Universal are NOT in the market for exchanging the Marvel family rights. X-men, Avengers, Fantastic Four and Spidey will continue to stay where they are. If Dis really cared enough to push ahead with a Superhero presence they have ample material between GoTG, BH6 and Incredibles to do so.

The days of Disney needing to pay for outside IP are over, they have a steady stream that they can't even get on top of.

 

[ChrisFL]

They could just call say they were upgraded to the Guardians of the Universe

 

[Parkscope Joe]

When it's the silly season for rumors and previously credible sources are citing different variations on a theme, I think it's reasonable to question if information is being deliberately leaked to catch the leakers.

This is my understanding of the situation. I also believe that theses projects are nowhere near green lit (as said by those insiders) and just a lot of imagineers working to keep their jobs.

Also height balloons mean NOTHING. Remember the height balloons in DAK for their Soarin' back in early 2000s? All height balloons mean is the project got enough money for development they could pay to raise some balloons. That's it.

 

[Galaxy Defender]

They could just call say they were upgraded to the Guardians of the Universe

Then they get into trouble with SixFlags. That is the name of the leaders of the Green Lantern Corps.

 

[Scott W.]

I believe when the MCU was starting to boom in 2010; they had to revise the contract. I can be wrong, but I think it was around that time that they included the MCU into the contract.

And yes, characters would be ruled out.

Has anybody seen the revised contract outside of Disney and Universal?

So they can't use the characters or the Marvel brand. Sounds like an interesting ride...

I know you are being facetious, but you are talking about roughly a 4 billion dollar exchange for WDW to build a GoTG ride...

Disney bought Marvel for 4 billion.... the value of the theme park rights in Florida are a fraction of a fraction of that.

If this is built, it will be well within Disney's rights and will (and already likely has been) clarified between closed doors between both parties. No "Marvel" branding, no reference to Avengers, no Marvel villains. Just GoTG in an original attraction. No money exchanging hands needed.

Disney and Universal are NOT in the market for exchanging the Marvel family rights. X-men, Avengers, Fantastic Four and Spidey will continue to stay where they are. If Dis really cared enough to push ahead with a Superhero presence they have ample material between GoTG, BH6 and Incredibles to do so.

The days of Disney needing to pay for outside IP are over, they have a steady stream that they can't even get on top of.

I think they're saying 4 billion for Disney to build anything they like not just GOTG.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

I believe when the MCU was starting to boom in 2010; they had to revise the contract. I can be wrong, but I think it was around that time that they included the MCU into the contract.

And yes, characters would be ruled out.

The only update to the contract after Disney purchased Marvel was to what financial information UOR has to provide to Marevl.

 

[Ultranel]

I know you are being facetious, but you are talking about roughly a 4 billion dollar exchange for WDW to build a GoTG ride...

Disney bought Marvel for 4 billion.... the value of the theme park rights in Florida are a fraction of a fraction of that.

If this is built, it will be well within Disney's rights and will (and already likely has been) clarified between closed doors between both parties. No "Marvel" branding, no reference to Avengers, no Marvel villains. Just GoTG in an original attraction. No money exchanging hands needed.

Disney and Universal are NOT in the market for exchanging the Marvel family rights. X-men, Avengers, Fantastic Four and Spidey will continue to stay where they are. If Dis really cared enough to push ahead with a Superhero presence they have ample material between GoTG, BH6 and Incredibles to do so.

The days of Disney needing to pay for outside IP are over, they have a steady stream that they can't even get on top of.

Yeah I was being unrealistic, but at the same time Disney keep testing the water on this, with rumors of bringing Some Marvel in one way or the other to FL and advertising Marvel on specific monorails just to make sure no rule is broken and so on... Just let it go and focus on opening new original attractions and just accept that it is what it is in FL. They should've thought about that before buying Marvel.... When it comes to the price I proposed... my point was that if the situation was all the way around, Disney would have made it impossible for UO to acquire those rights.... So! why not to play the same game back with them.... after all Disney/Marvel is releasing blockbuster movies and MSHI can only benefit from that.