It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


[HOAX] Isaac CARET - Drones [HOAX]

page: 395
<< 392  393  394    396  397  398 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 01:11 PM
If anyone is interested, here are the trademark numbers pertaining to the language that Alienware is using. This information comes in response to an email I sent to Winnie W.

(I will provide a print screen, direct from the email account I used if needed, but only on a personal basis being as that it contains my real name.)

RE: Alienware language copyright Friday, October 31, 2008 5:34 PM
From: "Winnie Wong" Add sender to Contacts To: I removed my email address for privacy

Hi I removed my real name for privacy,

Thank you for your interest and your inquiry. Our version of the alien
language is proprietary to Alienware and is protected by intellectual
property rights, including trademark application nos. 77/557,495;
77/557,500; and 77/557,502.
At this time we are not granting permission to others to use the
language commercially.

Winnie Wong
Alienware Corporation

-----Original Message-----
From: I removed my email address for privacy
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 1:46 PM
To: Winnie Wong
Subject: Alienware language copyright

Good afternoon,

I am a fan of Alienware products and own a notebook of the brand at
present. However, I am curious and would like to know if alienware has
the 'Alien Language' used on your website and products copyrighted.
Because if not I am interested in using and benefiting from the language

as well. If it is copyrighted, can you by chance supply me with the
copyright number, so as I can confirm it.

Thank you kindly,

I removed my real name for privacy

[edit on 10/31/2008 by agent violet]

[edit on 10/31/2008 by agent violet]

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 01:17 PM
oh no, double post.

Edit to add, and I guess no longer make this a double post:

Here is the link to the Us trademark page:
which states that:

"Trademarks, copyrights and patents all differ. A copyright protects an original artistic or literary work; a patent protects an invention. For copyright information, go to For patent information, go to"

Also she uses the word "...Intellectual property rights,..."

So, here is what the wiki site had to say about that: "Intellectual property (IP) is a legal field that refers to creations of the mind such as musical, literary, and artistic works; inventions; and symbols, names, images, and designs used in commerce,including copyrights, trademarks, patents, and related rights. Under intellectual property law, the holder of one of these abstract properties has certain exclusive rights to the creative work, commercial symbol, or invention by which it is covered."


[edit on 10/31/2008 by agent violet]

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 01:55 PM
you know its kinda wierd these docs look very similar to the more recent crop circles in haime mausans lectures, any one else notice that?

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 02:04 PM
reply to post by agent violet

Please be careful with the paste key
, the email disclaimer reads that only you may view the emails, I'm positive this thread will be popular with AW staff, and Winnie, which may stop current leads with AW.

So far determined is that copyright is with Alienware, as kindly reassured by Angela, from Ireland, land of discovery, on the 22nd this month and today by you

The questions now should be aimed at clevo/alienware for manufacture dates (to proove production started before caret), and also LMH, who has spread deceit and false information throughout this case.

Lets see what we can dig up

[edit on 31-10-2008 by fill0000]

[edit on 31-10-2008 by fill0000]

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 02:11 PM
Here is the Trademark page detailing the alien language and the dates! that the trademark(s) were registered:

(Date of Status: 2008-09-03 Filing Date: 2008-08-27)

(Date of Status: 2008-09-03 Filing Date: 2008-08-27)

(Date of Status: 2008-09-03 Filing Date: 2008-08-27)

Here is the page where you yourself can enter the numbers:

Also, thank you fil for the heads-up.

Also, eta: The first use date is stated as: 2007-11-00, Can someone please clarify as to what this means? Also, I presume that this date is of great importance depending on whether or not it was used prior to the making of the fortunecity site. Can someone please verify what date the fortunecity site was created?

[edit on 10/31/2008 by agent violet]

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 02:13 PM
reply to post by agent violet

Excellent Violet excellent..That clinches that! Kudos on the response..And guess what Today marks the anniversary tha Banzai received his fom the same person.
No Ifs anymore..It was theirs!. I am still waiting on two independent ODMs who make these things for several brand names to answer on the Production date.
Trademarks are hard to get..and must establish a real prior get that..
Just look at the ufo hunters history vs Sci Fi vs Mufon debacle.
Copyright would be more flexible in going back long as you can show dated use before anyone. I forgot to see if its just an app for trademark or or a granted trademark. Hmmm They just applied for pending.
still..That then raises the question how is the fortune site still up..without acknowledgement unless they have an agreement. Dell and its subsidiaries (therefore Alienware)are notorious for going after ANY infringement or even phonetic sounding of their sitenames and or merchandise.
They are therefore cooperating and or one and the same even though alleged first use was according to them 11/2007 but the machines were made well in advance..just going to exhibits done at electronics shows. Also I note no reference made to use of the vector brushes just the letters.

That also raises the second question..Just what the heck was the crock load of bull Linda was selling us that she litterally had OM and the DRT at her beck and call. All those Witnesseses..all those prior Shirley ..Oooh..yes Shirley..and Mariotti..the Divinity PHD and hypnotist. I think she did more damage along with c2c than anyone.
I can almost..almost..forgive Alienware..its business and EA did it with Ammo Marketing..and their Maj 12 game scheme in the forums. We are not the only ones looking..Its just a matter of time now. we are appreciative for any info Alienware releases now...So I hope nothing is construed as lambasting.
Both you and Fil you have given us a great trick or treat at least as a teaser..
I wonder how Tom hall feels about this use of SGA, however AW is attempting to bypass that by saying it was use of certain English Language characters.
I have a feeling they may not have an easy time of trademarking the letters.
Kudos..anyway..still a step in right direction.

[edit on 31-10-2008 by Sys_Config]

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 04:46 PM

Originally posted by agent violet
Also, eta: The first use date is stated as: 2007-11-00, Can someone please clarify as to what this means? Also, I presume that this date is of great importance depending on whether or not it was used prior to the making of the fortunecity site. Can someone please verify what date the fortunecity site was created?

Thanks agent violet, great work!

The first use date is November 2007, which is when Alienware released their Area51 m15x, m17x laptops. What I don't understand about the date is that they started using the alien characters in October for their contest.

This Sweepstakes begins at 12 a.m. P.S.T. on October 22 and ends at 11:59 p.m. P.S.T. November 12. Alienware is a trademark of Alienware Corporation 2007.

The site went up June 26th 2007. That leaves 3 1/2 months for AW to come up with their contest, design all their contest graphics, websites, and manufacture the embossed laptops.

All of the copyright dates are from within the last 2 months. Does anyone have any guesses as to why AW would wait 1 year to copyright the letters?

[edit on 31-10-2008 by freelance_zenarchist]

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 05:23 PM
Registry Whois
Domain Name:

this one is for the fancier one setup by Todd shwartz and Tony Savo of Softwired who is also webmaster of Butterfield and Shwartz, same as Todd Shwartz..
References to softwired appear gone in the later one but is same guys.
June 26, The fortune city site , same date, was setup within a couple of hours after release by LMH. Same guys
Registrar: GODADDY.COM, INC.
Whois Server:
Referral URL:

Expiration Date: 2010-06-26
Creation Date: 2007-06-26
Last Update Date: 2008-06-12

Name Servers:

This is lindas Events the week immediately prior and to that date.
06/26/2007 — Part 1: Explanation of the Recent "Strange Craft" Sightings ( Isaac and CARET)
• 06/26/2007 — Part 2: Documentation, Palo Alto CARET Laboratory Q4-86 Research Report
• 06/18/2007 — Crop Circles On Rings and Three Mysterious Aerial Lights in Slovenia
• 06/18/2007 — Writing In Chad "Drone" Image - A Link to NASA Clementine 1 Moon Mission?
• 06/15/2007 — Part 1: Yosemite National Park and Northridge, California, Aerial Dragonfly “Drones”
• 06/08/2007 — More Drone Photos and Other Eyewitnesses

2 days later Android heard it while in earlier we assume, than June 26, and did same vector and designs..
for his bluetech painting along with several others he did on the spot at the SuperDeluxe hotel

So production is key here..AW just can't do it., and have a special bios ready from 3/ was a specific bios not general across the board..or early m15 users would have ported that over from sager or it rater than have the m15x machines overheat and down clock as they did..

[edit on 31-10-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 31-10-2008 by Sys_Config]

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 06:13 PM
reply to post by freelance_zenarchist

Hey Zen, Sys, and all other ARC members,

I had some similar thoughts about the belated copyright date and a few observations.

First, I have been following the actual in-print Alienware magazine ads using the LAP - Alien alphabet design with these observations:

1.) All of the ads I have seen are in computer/technology/gaming magazines;

2.) They all are full single pages placed on the right-hand side of the magazine binding;

3.) Interestingly enough, all seem to be only the LAP spirals as a faded background, not distinctly in focus;

4.) And, none at all show ANY alien language characters.

5.) The ads ran for a short time only, centering around three months early this year, around March/April/May 2008, then none after June/July.

Since the AW ‘decipher the alien message' online contest, the copyright itself, and advertising blitz had to cost mucho bucks, I always wondered why Alienware didn't print more visible alien lettering that is embossed on their computers. Perhaps the spirals were more visually pleasing in an artsy-fartsy sort of way, or the language characters looked too much like Klingon et al.

I had an idea regarding all of this.

Could it be possible that Isaac and Company put the time and effort into a ‘spec' project and try to sell the concept to various computer builders or game creators such as Electronic Arts?

Prior to them approaching these companies, they could have ‘leaked' the LAP, Language, and photographs as sort of a pre-sale publicity exposure event. They could then say that the LAP-Language design was already popular with the technology community on the Internet. This would obviously add value to their sales pitch.

This would explain the late dating of the copyright application and the limited ad exposure as sort of a ‘testing the water' concept.

Any thoughts, Colleagues?

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 06:31 PM
Even though we have the caret website up on June 26th, we must not forget we first saw caret symbols on the 7th of may, from chad photographs, they were visable, not clearly, although they were there, this was 5 weeks before caret, so we know alienware must of already had these symbols in progress, before the caret website went up.

Although, the symbols on the drones were prooved to be mixed up with what we managed to decrypt in the alienware flash promotion files, this could mean that symbols were leaked before they were in font map form, or the hoaxer typed gibberish to avoid us finding the pattern.

Could be testing the water though as klatunictobarata said, it is also possible android got his first glance at these way before the caret site.

I still have Todd on my MSN, we used to talk a while ago, I forgot all about him. I'm currently left a bit confused with these guys though, was there ever two, or is it one under two alias's? Todds email seems to be used with the name Tony on some websites pulled from google.

[edit on 31-10-2008 by fill0000]

posted on Oct, 31 2008 @ 08:44 PM
reply to post by fill0000

Excellent point on the May letters fill
And no, No, These are two separate people , more like partners/or associate buddies , Todd the in Oregon, Oswego , Tony moved to Bellingham WA from there shrtly thereafter and is a software developer (Joomla) and content delivery webmaster/owner of Softwired. Todd would not know how to put a site together, Softwire put it up, thats Sova who did it, as well as Todds own Firm site, Butterfield and Shwartz, and the defunct Sindynasty game site as well...Both Isaac sites sit there and renewed recently.
I got the info from wayback archives

Asa caution to myself really,
We must be careful here or we can go in circles. There is at this time not much we can do about them. But their ability to setup the sites so quickly in hours, as if all three were glued to c2c radio that night or day, or ludicrous if not patently absurd., and I see no history of ufological involvement for any of them nor Android.who said he got it from c2c..not Linda.while in Japan ,.Thats a nice feat right there. If you asked Him what was on c2c lately ..he would most likely look at you like you are crazy. Tell him you are a tree hugger , like jams, Art and Games..thats different.
But all of them have plenty of business dealings, ..this is highly peculiar, We know that and quite frustrating..
But they and especially LMH become a very manageable priority and source of enjoyment, when we resolve the production dates.
I hope my contacts respond soon before Monday.

[edit on 1-11-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 1-11-2008 by Sys_Config]

posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 12:55 PM

Originally posted by klatunictobarata

Could it be possible that Isaac and Company put the time and effort into a ‘spec' project and try to sell the concept to various computer builders or game creators such as Electronic Arts?

Possible? Muahahahahaha! Probable is more like it.

Originally posted by freelance_zenarchistAll of the copyright dates are from within the last 2 months. Does anyone have any guesses as to why AW would wait 1 year to copyright [Trademark] the letters?

To complete the process above. Once the deep-pockets at Dell/AW completed the deal, the transaction effected, the agreement sealed, contingency clauses enforced (specifically, non-disclosure by "Isaac" & Co.), the trademark would be the legal instrument by which AW maintains exclusive controls, rights, potential remunerations thereof.

p.s. to Dell/AW (we know you're lurking and watching): Guess what? I just sold my signature below for an undisclosed sum. Care to sue me? I dare 'ya!

posted on Nov, 1 2008 @ 04:10 PM
I wouldn't taunt them quite yet Outrageo, my friend, though the temptation is great..Its not just them Lurking, they are still in the drivers seat, until we pull in the rest of the data.
That Spec group included Raj with his emails to OMF, Jenn to Casebook, Chad Ty and Isaac to Linda and c2c, who have their ips and where they called from , multiple times, since the very beginning. They deliberatley withheld in concert with PIs, who may turn out to be paid not by the DRT stooges, but via The one who appeared to excercise control, not DRT but LMH and or That spec group and the interests it represented.

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 02:22 PM
while developments continue,
Kudos to 11 11 for an outstanding comparison between a real model and Rajs cgi , thanks to HPO a dutch Engr..who created the real model and suspended it.
It demonstrated how really glaring the differences were. This has been ported over the ARC stash in my profile.
quoting 11 11
"I believe HPO's model further proves that the drone is CGI. It highlights the lighting issues even more (when you are an expert with light).

I will try to explain.

As we all know, light reflects. When an object is hit with a strong light, like the Sun, that object then reflects light back. This is why we are able to see the object.

On PICT0016 there is a small shadow under the large arm, close to the main body.
HPO's model doesn't have the small shadow.
The reason HPO's model doesn't have that shadow, is because the light is reflecting off of the main body of the drone, and illuminating the bottom of the arm.
On the drone in PICT0016, the main body is NOT reflecting this light, BUT IT SHOULD BE. This is a sign of CGI lighting.

In CGI, they call light reflections "bounces". You can choose how many light bounces you want to render. If you choose 0 bounces during the render, the program will not calculate any light reflections off of objects. The higher you set the bounces in render, the more light will reflect off of objects. Here is an example of a program rendering light, and every pass is adding more bounces:
he more bounces you add, the more passes are needed, and the longer it takes to render.

My conclusion is that the drone in PICT0016 is a CGI render, which has a very low light bounce/reflection setting, or not enough passes were done during render. Even though the main body of the drone is fully illuminated, it is not reflecting any light where it should, and there is an obvious shadow. This is a sign of fake CGI lighting, and missing light bounces.

A low bounce setting is common, because it cuts down render time, and you can produce images much faster. Also, it would take a super computer to calculate light bounces/reflections and display them like they would be seen in reality. So it is very rare for CGI light reflections to match reality.

Radiosity is the type of light that calculates bounces.

HPO Model = correct reflections/bounces
PICT0016 = incorrect/missing reflections/bounces

--There is more lighting issues with PICT0016. I will explain later.

The animation below was made by SPF33, and displayed at DRT. I think he forgot to mention he changed the brightness and possibly other settings of HPO's image, so that it better matches PICT0016. These are also the images I used in this post:
There is a very important shadow that is going ignored. Here is the shadow:
here is only one object that can create this shadow, and it is the large arm. I know this is a shadow because in PICT0017 supposedly taken after PICT0016 doesn't show that shadow:
The shadow is gone, because the drone has tilted.

However, in PICT0015, that shadow is there again:
This proves the shadow is from the drones largest arm/wing!!

What this means is, in PICT0016, there is very few directions the light could possibly be, in order to make the shadow of the arm appear in that spot. The image below illustrates the only possible angles of light that would create that shadow:

Since we know the shadow is from the arm/wing, we can draw lines from the arm to the shadow, and estimate the direction of the light source. The maximum angle of light that would display the shadow there, is the yellow line. This is because it is the end of the arm/wing, and if the angle was more, the arm would not cast a shadow in that spot. The red lines are other possible light angles that would create that shadow, but they can not be correct because it doesn't match the rest of the image.

This shadow also shows again that the drone has incorrect lighting compared to the telephone pole. There is two different light sources.

Once again, it is a fact that the shadow is created by the arm/wing. That shadow is very important, and missing from HPO's tests.

In PICT0015, the drone appears to be flying level, and the shadow from the arm is showing in the same spot as in PICT0016. This is a clue to the angle of the drone in PICT0016. It appears the light source used on PICT0016 was level with the arm, and the part of the body that is showing the shadow, which is very inconsistent with the light and shadows on the telephone pole.

It's the second smoking gun shadow problem.

The above shadow exists because of the angle of the drone to the light. PICT0016 should have something similar, but doesn't. This shows that PICT0016's arm is NOT pointed directly at the light source, which is the only way to get HPO's model to look like PICT0016, and illuminate the body of the drone.

As we all know, PICT0016 has a very large missing shadow under the arm. The only way this is possible, is if the arm is pointed at the Sun. But this would create long shadows off of the fans/nubs like in HPO's model. This proves again, that there is multiple light sources used in PICT0016." EOQ

well Done AllisOne./11 11

[edit on 2-11-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 2-11-2008 by Sys_Config]

posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 11:20 AM
Hi guys, i had followed this story with great interest when it came out last year and was just looking about for any updates and came across this site.

I've tried reading through the last few pages of comments but have found it very confusing. mostly because there is alot of use of abbrevations that i just don't understand.

As far as i can make out this was all a marketing/viral advert campaign for Alienware laptops. (I gotta admit i don't think it was a very good one, the images and documents were brilliant but it has nothing to do with laptops!) If this is the case i will never buy Alienware or Dell kit again.

Could somebody please just give an overview of the findings if this is incorrect, or if indeed it is correct. What was the smoking gun for Alienware being the perpitraitors? I've seen the contest they produced but that is easily ripped off after the event.

Many thanks

posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 12:54 PM
reply to post by Anonymous ATS

It has indeed been a long and confusing saga! I don't think there is anything like a "smoking gun" that nails down the whodunit. Yet. You can click on Sysco's name up there and look in his attic, or just click here:

There is a lot of stuff there, most of it very interesting. Unfortunately, there is no Cliff's Notes version at this point. You will have to invest some time if you want to understand what has come to light. Good Luck!

posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 04:08 PM
reply to post by Sys_Config

Thank you Sys.

I knew all of this would get interesting right after HPO finished his plastic model.

You know the cool part about those models, is that you can use them to make a mold. Once you make the mold, you can reproduce those by the 1000's. I wouldn't be surprised if someone was funding this.

[edit on 4-11-2008 by ALLis0NE]

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 02:51 AM
Greetz ALL and Double, and welcome anonymous..
Yes it would make a novel prop, but I think the hammering in of hoax so convincingly and repeatedly, now has reduced the opportunity of even a modicum of profit. even if all the DRT purchased much of an audience is left unless they were planning a video, as Linda seems to always remark how she produces and films etc.. and who would care to watch a hoaxed item, even with Tom Cruise playing Isaac. HPO was using it for a trade show he said as well as personal inerest.
perhaps a nice Tiara for Linda or crown for whitley.

I have been in contact with the Fringeware people, sme very outstanding writers and internet pioneers, absolutely fascinating,and can discount their involvement.. They did recognize something and are scouring the remainder of their issues that dealt with area 51 and ufos. One of their former contributors/ artist is mstly responsible for the alien heads we have come to love on Alienware and elsewhere, as well as the OP Manual how to take over a planet,

So, that leaves the same old people at the beginning. why is that?
The only ones profiting besides web hits and subscriptions, , like Linda, from any of this, has been Alienware based on their use of the graphics and letters, and stardock who designed the GUI for Alienware at that time. Their Intellectual property attorney in Chicago, who has represented Dell in a slew of infrigement cases..has not gone after the caret site attorney, who would be duty bound to take it down if it was not his to begin with. Thats a glaring peculiarity given the cases he/his team have undertaken to protect any of their trademarks.Interesting concept though..Ufos manned by Lawyers..
powered by BS. with LMH and C2C as navigators. Gives a new twist to God is my co-pilot.
or they just think we are like Frank Zappa sang once
Dumb all over.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by Sys_Config]

posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 04:58 PM
Hey Sys!

You all have been really pushing the envelope! Nice job all around on sticking with this.

It seems you all have made quite a lot of progress on this. It seems so long ago that this all began, right?

Either way, I really liked the comment where one of you all said to be leery of walking in circles on this. Of course we all are going round and round....
Check the image... you seem to be following the 'map' to a T....

Best wishes on the continued progress, and don't allow the 'players' to distract from the path.

P.S. Sys- Whom ever is running the site that has the image I linked, seems to be some sort of ally of at least in the know. I dug pretty deep, or so I thought, to find the 'patch' on my avatar. And like a slap in the face when I am looking for 'the map' for is the same image, among others.... I feel a bit like someone seeded google knowing where I would look.... freaky! Check it out for yourself. If I didn't know that I scanned my avatar my self, I would assume that if I were someone else that I got it there....

[edit on 6/11/2008 by DocMoreau]

posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 06:00 PM
!0- 4 Doc Welcome back..and good googly D ..check my u2u to you..we are on same page.!!! amazing..some how I felt being steered as well..I will follow up your links..
He borrowed from isaac and comments here
IP site info says paul diddy brooklyn, but he says he is from Wisconsin, and lives in LA via Berlin....Go Figure..hehe anyway very creative guy. very cosmic..mayan prophecy and lots on daniel Pinchenbeck...lots of art..and links to art groups. Those black Base badges were kewl.

Now I did see connection between Gnn Alienscientist, who has those neat videos on everything Isaac talked about.and Stephen Marshall co founder of GNN..Android aso affiliated wit GNN projects. The link is in the post after Attovishnu..

Now back to alienware stardocks , we recall that 2006 contest alien , announced a parnership with Dockstar ..yet we find that announcement between alienware stardock and skin factory in 2004 for the ALX 2007 models gui designs yet to be developed. 2004
So that indicates the level of preplanning..they do for these things.
Again making it more unlikely the use design was completed after june 26, 2007

[edit on 7-11-2008 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 7-11-2008 by Sys_Config]

top topics

<< 392  393  394    396  397  398 >>

log in