OvomorphMember0 XPApr-23-2012 9:55 AMHmmm... This is very curious. I just noticed that on the OFFICIAL site, an edit has been made to the Major Security aquisition notes in the Timeline. It now makes NO reference to actual names of current real world defense contractors.
[b]MAJOR SECURITY ACQUISITIONS[/b]
Weyland acquires four of the largest existing defense conglomerates in the world. These major acquisitions significantly bolsters multinational defense, security, and aerospace technology holdings.
April 3, 2032
But this is how it originally looked......
APRIL 3RD, 2032 - [b]MAJOR SECURITY ACQUISITIONS[/b]
Weyland acquires Northrop Grumman, Boeing, BAE Systems and Lockheed Martin. These major acquisitions significantly bolsters multinational defense, security, and aerospace technology holdings.
Interesting... Could it be that one of more of these firms objected to their names being using in the backstory plot of this movie??
9 Responses to Interesting edit to the Weyland Industries TIMELINE
OvomorphMember0 XPApr-23-2012 10:06 AMProbably. They tend to make people pay a license fee for using images of their planes/etc. in movies. Maybe they're just as touchy about having their names used.
OvomorphMember0 XPApr-23-2012 11:19 AMYeah, it might be possible that major players in our current military industrial complex would have objections to being associated with an all-powerful, evil-empire bent on global and universal/economic conquest.
Go figure ; )
DeaconMember10390 XPApr-23-2012 1:04 PMYeah bloody NWO...
They dont like a movie stealing their lime light, we cant do a movie like that with one major controlling party, the NWO/USA would not be happy at that.
Maybe thats why Ridley cant carry on with the Xeno, because the Queen has objections... well sorry madam but the Queen in Aliens was a Bug, not a 7ft Lizard in a Hollogram...
And as for Obama Bin Laden you ant fooling no one ;)
on a serious note, yeah does look like maybe a copy right issue in using names of real corperations.R.I.P Sox 01/01/2006 - 11/10/2017
OvomorphMember0 XPApr-23-2012 2:32 PMActually it would be a trademark issue, not copyright. A copyright protects creative works while a trademark protects a name/visual element used in business.
The website is probably considered an advertisement, so that may be the issue. OvomorphMember0 XPApr-23-2012 6:03 PMI work with employees from three of these firms (the most recognized ones historically) due to my work with the military and I can say that the competition between these companies is extreme. They can't stand each other and makes for some pretty agravating situations every time they have to repair a piece of equipment that uses tech from each company. They would not allow any type of merge or buyout even in a fictional setting. These companies are too proud for that.OvomorphMember0 XPApr-24-2012 2:17 AM"They would not allow any type of merge or buyout even in a fictional setting."
Yeah, especially Lockheed/Martin and Northrop/Grumman. ;)Add A Reply
Log in to Post
