Foreign movies not using real US Government organization names, fear of lawsuits?

I watched a couple of Canadian made movies recently, and in both of them notably they didn’t use the actual names for US Government agencies. The movie Blue Monkey has the “Institute for Disease Control” or IDC instead of the “Center for Disease Control” or CDC, and the movie Expect No Mercy has the “Federal Security Bureau” or FSB instead of the “Federal Bureau of Investigation” or FBI. I also saw a movie shot in Eastern Europe where they had the “USA Marshals” with jackets that said USAM instead of the US Marshals.

I was wondering if they chose to use non-official names for them because they were Canadian or other foreign productions and thus wouldn’t be protected by American 1st Amendment or related rules. I almost never seen altered names for actual US government agencies unless it’s done for either parody or plot related reasons (for example a super secret agency not related to the above ones).

I’m familiar with Blue Monkey through Brandon Tenold’s YouTube channel. He does series called Canucksploitation-a-thon featuring low budget movies made in Canada. Many of the films are meant to be set in the US just to draw a larger audience, but the production values are kind of low and many things get missed.

ETA: Expect No Mercy is featured in this year’s Son of Son of Son of Canucksploitaton-a-thon.
.

I really can’t see anyone at risk of being sued by a government agency because they, for example, were depicted as disregarding the threat of a kaiju emerging from their toxic waste dump, or ignoring the pleas of a woman being pursued by the ghost of a serial killer we all thought died 25 years ago.

I know that film-makers use fake police force names and insignia - because real police organisations have good reason not to hand that sort of stuff around. Similarly its probably much easier and cheaper to get your designers to crank out relevant placards, car badges, computer screen logos for the Federal Bureau of Inquiry or InterPolice than to negotiate getting copies of the real thing.

Nitpick: it’s the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Could it just be from ignorance? If I made a movie set in an Eastern European country and didn’t have the time or money to figure out what agencies they actually have, I’d just make up something that my audience would recognize. The Slovenia Bureau of Investigation probably doesn’t exist, but if I put that in the script, the audience would understand what the SBI does without much explanation.

I think all the US government agencies have trademaked their logos and will enforce them if used without their permission, hence why they do this

It’s just a basic storytelling tool that heads off any “well, actually…” criticism if they don’t get something exactly right about a real life agency.

It’s possible that legal entanglements just aren’t worth it.

Endorsement, trademarks, and agency logos

You cannot use government materials in a way that implies endorsement by a government agency, official, or employee. For example, using a photo in your advertisement of a government official wearing or using your product is not permitted.

You also cannot use federal government trademarks or federal government agency logos without permission. For example, in general, you cannot use an agency logo or trademark on your social media page to suggest endorsement or sponsorship by the agency.

According to Wikipedia, Canada requires fictional brands to be used for commercial products.

Television programs made in Canada for the Canadian market are not permitted to show or mention real brand names except in certain specific circumstances. The CRTC’s prohibition of product placement exists primarily to prevent producers from accepting payola, especially if accepting it affects creative control or leads producers to attempt to deceive the audience (by, for instance, implying that X Brand Olive Oil is the best brand because the host uses it).[citation needed] In some instances (especially cooking and home improvement shows) brand names are merely inked, taped, or edited out; in dramatic presentations, however, fake brand names may be used. The restriction does not apply to news or current affairs programs when mention of the brand is necessary to fairly and fully present the subject matter, and it does not apply to televised sporting events, where branding may be beyond the station’s control.

I would think the names of government agencies would be public domain, but perhaps the Canadian authorities make them use fictional substitutes. Or perhaps the habit is just deep-seated.

Or inherited from the Brits, who made the Kinks change from “Coca-Cola” to “Cherry Cola.”

The very silly Black Cat 2: The Assassination of President Yeltsin was a Hong Kong production (it was the sequel to a La Femme Nikita knockoff) that has a scene at the headquarters of the Central Intelligent (sic) Agency, whose signage is, if memory serves, an 8-1/2 x 11 piece of paper stuck to the office wall. Considering how Ed Wood-level incompetent the flick is, I doubt that was a deliberate fudging of the agency’s name.

Those of us old enough to remember the Mission Impossible TV series recall how they not only invented names of countries, but also came up with weird words for stop signs (Alti, Alte, Alta, Altze, etc.) and a hundred different variations on “telephone” for the trucks Barney and Willy drove so they could install their spy equipment.

Also see the American movie, The President’s Analyst.

I’ve been watching that for the first time this year (found the bluray box set for cheap-ish) and you’re completely right. They’re also often vague on the country entirely: the mission tape often says something like “This enemy of ours…” or “The enemy nation…”

On that note, The West Wing once made up The Republic of Equitorial Kundu in their early seasons, but by the end they were setting overseas crises in Kazakhstan.