Some time ago I read that the now standard statement that a film is entertainment only and any resemblance to actual people, events and companies is purely coincidental, was first used in the 1930 film 'The Flying Scotsman'. What is supposed to have happened is that the film company asked for permission to use on of the LNER's engines and some rolling stock, the company agreed believing that they would get some free publicity that way. The directors of the LNER asked that they be shown the film before it was released. This turned out to be a good move for two reasons: 1. Supposedly unknown to them the film was about how a drunken engineer wrecks the Flying Scotsman' express. 2. In the scenes of the climactic crash model carriages are shown freely rolling away from the train, after seeing this scene, LNER's Chief Designer, Sir Nigel Gresly, was supposed to have said that anyone who saw the film would get the impression that the company had not discovered brakes. LNER then pressured the film maker to change the film and as a result when it was shown to the public it supposedly began with a credit that stated that dramatic licence had been taken and the film in no way reflected the actual operating practices of the LNER. Has anyone seen reference to this or heard of anything similar, certainly the Hollywood practice of not using real corporate names seems to have started at or around this point in time. Graham Disaster Movie Donald

Some time ago I read that the now standard statement that a film is entertainment only and any resemblance to actual people, events and companies is purely coincidental, was first used in the 1930 film 'The Flying Scotsman'. Certainly the disclaimer was in use by 1945, because it was involved in a lawsuit over the film They Were Expendable , which was made that year.   A naval officer who claimed that the movie's portrayal of him was defamatory won his lawsuit (but collected a mere $3,000) despite the fact that the movie carried the standard disclaimer, and despite the fact that the character in question (played by John Wayne) had a name ( Rusty Ryan ) different from that of the real-life plaintiff (Robert B. Kelly). On the other hand, the movie also acknowledged that it was _base_d on a book in which the real name of the plaintiff, not the movie-character name, was used.  But it wasn't the book's author or publisher who got sued, but the movie's producers.