There’s not a lot of law here because the parties settled. I’m just struck by the strangeness of the idea. An amusement park ride based on The Tonight Show? I mean, amusement parks are mostly for kids, right? Kids who go to sleep on school nights before The Tonight Show, right? I can imagine one kid seeing the signs for the attraction and asking an older sibling “What’s The Tonight Show?” A common answer, it seems to me, would be, “That’s the show that Mom and Dad fall asleep in front of.” I don’t think the next line would be “Awesome! Let’s wait in line for that!”
Anyhoo, Katie Rice, writing for The Orlando Sentinel, reports that Universal entered into an agreement in April 2014 with an Austrian company known as DyMoRides. The two parties had previously worked together on another proposed project that fell through. Wait, there was an even lamer idea than a Tonight Show ride?
DyMoRides was to construct the Jimmy Fallon ride, but the parties very quickly started squabbling. Universal terminated the contract in October 2015, because it alleged that DyMoRide was not completing the project on schedule. DyMoRide, for its part, claimed that Universal was responsible for the delays, because it insisted on changes once the project was begun, and in March 2021, it sued Universal for breach of contract. In addition, Universal engaged another company to complete the project but incorporated DyMoRide’s proprietary “Flyboard” ride technology without paying for a license. DyMoRide claimed that it was owed $5 million for its work plus an unspecified amount for the use of its intellectual property. The ride opened in April 2017.
Universal filed counterclaims in August, 2022, claiming the DyMoRides breached, because the work that it performed had significant deficiencies, requiring an additional $10 million investment from Universal to complete the ride. Moreover, Universal claimed that it was given a perpetual, irrevocable license to use DyMoRide’s technology.
Well, that’s all highly interesting. It gives an interesting peek into the logistics of amusement park attraction contracts. Unfortunately, the parties settled in March, and the terms of the settlement were not disclosed.
