Home

[A&S&O]

Now that is officially been announced that Epcot is gettibg a copy of Ratatouille, can anyone answer this hypothetical question.

If TWDC didn't now own DLP, would they have had to pay to use any of the technology / patents / anything? Obviously TWDC on the IP rights, but who paid for and therefore owns the concept of the ride?

[norhel]

Now that is officially been announced that Epcot is gettibg a copy of Ratatouille, can anyone answer this hypothetical question.

If TWDC didn't now own DLP, would they have had to pay to use any of the technology / patents / anything? Obviously TWDC on the IP rights, but who paid for and therefore owns the concept of the ride?

My theory would be that TWDC already did own the rights for Ratatouille, so I suspect that DLP had to pay TWDC for it. And that they already pay "rent" for it. And it also could be that Ratatouille was gonna happen no matter how much TWDC own DLP.
But that's just speculation from me. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Edit: Most probably it was WDI in California who designed the attraction.

[A&S&O]

Now that is officially been announced that Epcot is gettibg a copy of Ratatouille, can anyone answer this hypothetical question.

If TWDC didn't now own DLP, would they have had to pay to use any of the technology / patents / anything? Obviously TWDC on the IP rights, but who paid for and therefore owns the concept of the ride?

My theory would be that TWDC already did own the rights for Ratatouille, so I suspect that DLP had to pay TWDC for it. And that they already pay "rent" for it. And it also could be that Ratatouille was gonna happen no matter how much TWDC own DLP.
But that's just speculation from me. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Edit: Most probably it was WDI in California who designed the attraction.

IF DLP paid for the work to be done, would they own the rights to the concept / technology?

[Ohana]

Now you can call me petty, but I am a bit peeved about this. WDW and DL have had some fantastic announcements at D23 this year, and all we get is a crummy hotel upgrade (sorry, but it pales in comparison).

Now before people berate me, I get that DLP doesn't have the space that WDW has, and maybe even that DL has. I get that we have only just been bought out by Disney and that changes will take a significant amount of time to surface, but Ratatouille is DLP's thing! Haha. One of the few attractions that sets us apart from the sister parks, and it's now going to be in WDW anyway.

I get I'm being lame about this, it's just irked me somewhat ha ha!

[A&S&O]

Anyone that thought that there would be massive development after TWDC took over are deluded.

[norhel]

Now that is officially been announced that Epcot is gettibg a copy of Ratatouille, can anyone answer this hypothetical question.

If TWDC didn't now own DLP, would they have had to pay to use any of the technology / patents / anything? Obviously TWDC on the IP rights, but who paid for and therefore owns the concept of the ride?

My theory would be that TWDC already did own the rights for Ratatouille, so I suspect that DLP had to pay TWDC for it. And that they already pay "rent" for it. And it also could be that Ratatouille was gonna happen no matter how much TWDC own DLP.
But that's just speculation from me. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Edit: Most probably it was WDI in California who designed the attraction.

IF DLP paid for the work to be done, would they own the rights to the concept / technology?

I doubt it to be honest. But again I could be wrong.
What I think is most likely is that they just pay some royalties for it (in addition to the building cost etc).
Kinda when you buy a movie on a dvd, you just pay to get license to watch it at your home, you don't get the rights to edit and sell.

[norhel]

With regards to the D23 Expo, as far as I have seen, the international parks never have got the big announcements. Another thing I've heard, is that each park have to pay for the development themself.
If that's true, it might take some time before something start to get public knowledge.

[Rocketeer]

I would have thought that Remy L'Adventure would have been created by WDI and/or WDI's European arm. Both being owned by TWDC means there's no rights issue in terms of adding attractions to other parks. Same goes for the Tron Lightcycle. SDL doesn't 'own' that attraction.

I think the only time there are restrictions are when they have been added as part of the funding negotiations. If my memory serves me right, Mystic Manor is a HKDL exclusive for 5 or 10 years. This was probably added when the were negotiating with LegCo over the expansion. No doubt they wanted assurences that they would not shell out for an attraction, only to find it in the at the time, still-to-be-announced-SDL.


As for Paris' part in the D23 expo. Yeah a flimsy re-theme to a hotel is nothing to write home about, but given the time frame between the full aquisition and the expo, they probably did not have the ability to properly green light projects to announce.
I don't doubt that the Mouse would have been able to get it all sorted, but imagine if they didn't. They'd have some big attraction announcement at D23 that could drive the share price up. Not what you want when trying to get the best deal (from their side).

Not saying that WDI doesn't have plans for Paris - I'm sure there are dozens of ideas sitting waiting, let alone other plans from decades past. It's just a matter of getting the ducks in order, and then it'll be like one of those give away episodes of the Oprah Winfrey show. "You get an attraction, you get an attraction and you get an attraction"

[AJDisney]

Now before people berate me, I get that DLP doesn't have the space that WDW has, and maybe even that DL has

DLP actually has the biggest Disneyland park per size out of all of the Disneyland Parks (even bigger than the Magical Kingdom at WDW!). The studios is then the smallest of all the Disney parks (by quite some margin actually! The second smallest, DCA has over 10 acres more than the studios in Paris!). In  terms of overall size though, DLP is the second biggest resort behind WDW.

Disneyland Resort Paris – 4,800 Acres
(both DLP, the Studios and surrounding land that could be developed owned by Disney)

Disneyland Resort – 510 Acres
(Both Disneyland and DCA and surrouding area that could be developed owned by Disney).

[claire2281]

There are really only two obvious areas left for redevelopment at DLP now - the space between Pirates and Indy (which means something that would have to fit in Adventureland) and the area behind Toy Story Playland and Ratatouille. Those are the two big plots of land where something could fit. I strongly suspect WDS will be where the next brand new attraction lands as it really needs it (DLP being great as it is) and because you've got far more freedom over what goes there.

Tbh I'd make that area a full coherent Pixar land (Toy Story, Nemo, Cars and Ratatouille already being there) and have another area based on their films. Then leave the left hand side of the Studios to become Marvel based.

[A&S&O]

There are really only two obvious areas left for redevelopment at DLP now - the space between Pirates and Indy (which means something that would have to fit in Adventureland) and the area behind Toy Story Playland and Ratatouille. Those are the two big plots of land where something could fit. I strongly suspect WDS will be where the next brand new attraction lands as it really needs it (DLP being great as it is) and because you've got far more freedom over what goes there.

There's also a chunk of land between Star Tours and IASW.

[whatsupanders]

D23 is and has always been primarily about the US parks. Notice how there was no mention at all about the major developments taking place in Hong Kong or Tokyo.

Any addition to the Paris parks would be announced via the Disney Parks Blog or via live stream on YouTube. Either way, I don't think we should expect any announcements until after the 25th Anniversary season has ended.