Interesting Facts about Bell Labs and 2001: A Space Odyssey (2001)

The day 2001: A Space Odyssey opened in a theatre where I live the prac physics class at my university was almost empty much to the chagrin of the physics tutor. He didn't need to be told why his class had disappeared such was the film's publicly.

Next day we all cropped it especially me because I'd also just written a critical piece in the student rag about how badly science was being taught—right, it didn't go unnoticed (sometimes one loses one's presence of mind and that was just such an occasion).

I recall leaving the theatre with my mates in complete silence, we were essentially struck dumb while trying to understand or explain the film's unusual ending. Eventually we stammered out what we thought were explanations whilst trying to find the right adjectives. I cannot ever recall leaving another film in such a strange emotional state.

I am not and never have been a science fiction movie fan - Star Wars and such leave me bored to tears, I find science itself far more intesting, it's actually real and not just make believe. However, 2001 is in a different league altogether and for me the film remains one of the truly great film masterpieces. Much has been written about it so there's nothing I can add except to say it has stood the test of time—over a half century later it still thrills and entertains.

Only two weeks ago I saw the film again on TV and it still has retained much of its original aura. Yes, time and technology has partially caught up with it but only just—and I wish the film would be fully restored or digitally remastered to its former glory.

(I recall seeing a re-release of the film some seven or eight years after its first screening, this time in 70mm and not in its original Super Panavision format and I was somewhat disappointed as the print had lost some of its original lustre, the fantastic kaleidoscopic colours that appeared towards the end of the film were less intense and less saturated than the original (none of the copies I've seen since have equalled the truly excellent quality of that original Super Panavision print I saw back in 1968.)

I was confused about the AT&T complaint, since AT&T and the Bell system were the same My italics for the confusing part):

> What is even more interesting, however, is that Noll almost got into trouble for submitting the Bell System seal to producers who then displayed the seal outside of the video-phone booth in the movie (shown below). AT&T accused Bell System of violating a consent decree, which outlined that the Bell System could only cover domestic telecommunication. By depicting the logo in a space station in the film, it was implied that the System worked in space, which violated the consent decree … crazy right? Fortunately, they were able to settle the dispute.

Turns out this is likely be a typo. AT&T was afraid that the movie's depiction might imply that they were willing to violate their consent decree, and I guess the lawyers wanted to claim it was unauthorized in case the government contacted them. Kind of like the blustery letters lawyers sometimes send about trademarks: they have no intention of doing anything, but have to demonstrate that they "took steps to defend their trademark".

This is explained at this link that covers a lot of the same material (not surprising for an archivist, who was probably the same source for both): https://ethw.org/First-Hand:Bell_Labs_and_2001:_A_Space_Odys...

> After the movie appeared in early 1968, a manager at AT&T telephoned me to complain strongly that the Bell System seal had been used in the movie. AT&T objected because the use of the Bell seal implied that the Bell System was providing telecommunication service outside the United States, which court decree forbade it from doing. When I told the AT&T person that Pierce had approved my effort I was saved from the wrath. ...

The article discusses the picture-phone in 2001 as if it's commonplace technology today, but it really isn't. It's available, but people don't actually use it much outside of Zoom meetings for work. I've tried getting my family to use video chats to keep in touch since I live so far away from them, and either they can't be bothered (they just want to use voice, no video, and even this is rare), or they use their phone held in their hand so all I see is a blurry, shaky image far worse than the worst shaky-cam movie you can think of. We have the technical means to have great video chats, but we don't really use them; instead, people now prefer to communicate solely by text message, so we're effectively going back to something like a fancy telegraph.

I find the Bell Labs phenomenon fascinating. This book highlights some of the fascinating parts and one of my favorites. It goes in more detail about the video phone. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Idea_Factory.

This is from 2016, not 2001, though I can see how the submitter thought otherwise!

anyone have a link to the exact terms of the 1956 consent decree?