copyright libel question

I can't really speak to the legal issue (celebrities do have a much lower expectation of privacy in US law when it comes to people writing, but I'm not a lawyer and can't give specifics). Is it 1000% necessary that it be a real person, though? Could you make up a celebrity who intentionally bears resemblance to the person you're trying to use? If you say your character is descended from Clint Williams, a former president from Arkansas whose presidency is often remembered for a sex scandal, people are going to get that you're talking about Bill Clinton (just as an example).

I works this way ... anyone with more money and better lawyers than you, can sue for any reason and many times win. I don't know if the Grandchild would sue, but I bet the famous person would if they conceived the story put them in a bad light, or they could make money out of it.

If I remember correctly, the issue isn't quite one of libel, but more a matter of the right to control the commercial use of one's name (meaning the celebrity's, not the grandkid's, b/c the market for the book would be based on the celebrity, not on the grandkid per se). In other words, you can write a review or gossip or academic stuff or biographies about a celebrity, but you can't use the celebrity to sell a product (the issue is whether books are products, in this sense) without the celebrity's permission. It's a little closer to trademark than libel, at least with respect to the logic of the protection, except that we don't have to register our rights to ourselves anywhere.

In other words, you could have a story where characters go to a movie featuring Snipes, without any recourse by Snipes, or you could write an unauthorized biography (but everything in it had better be true or there's a risk of libel litigation), but I suspect that if the protagonist is an imaginary relative of his, there might be a potential cause of action (for profits from use of his name, or an injunction to prevent the use of his name and a recall of printed books), although it's been too, too long since I studied intellectual property to recall the details or be absolutely sure.

Your best bet is to run this past an intellectual property lawyer in your jurisdiction or else to use a fictional ancestor.

JD, not giving individual legal advice, just general information

kuatolives:
If I wanted to write a story about the exploits of the great grandson/daughter of a current famous person without that grandchild existing (yet/if ever) ....uh.....can I....without getting sued upon publication? Or is their name considered fair use?

Click to expand...

Sorry for asking this but why would you want to? I agree with LeeFlower that it would probably be better to make up a recognisable celebrity with similar traits, who you can develop to meet your needs.

In terms of the legality, if the 'hook' of your piece is the link to the current celebrity, then you are straying into commercial exploitation territory and it is more likely than not that you'll get a letter from their lawyers. If you're insistent on linking to a current celebrity (and bearing in mind that today's celebrity is tomorrow's "who?"), then definitely run it past a lawyer first.

Also agreeing with LeeFlower on the coming up with a thinly disguised version of the celebrity in question.

A recent example of this kind of thing is the "Jill Sanchez" character in Alisa Valdes-Rodriguez' "Make Him Look Good."

The proposal is in dangerous territory. Most of a good analysis concerns rights of publicity, which vary tremendously from state to state (let alone nation to nation). For example, California has codified its rights of publicity for celebrities to the point of having a registry, parallel to that for trademarks; New York, however, denies that any such right exists, and instead requires legal gymnastics to fit the basic cause of action into a different box.

Libel remains a concern, too; for one thing, it is possible to "libel the dead" in some jurisdictions (it's just not called that, even though the elements are the same).

The only real protection available may be the parody doctrine, which is fraught with difficulties, founded on poor logic and misunderstanding of both legal and literary theory, and varies across the country even more than does the right of publicity. It's not something that I can explain quickly; my current academic project is up well over 10,000 words.

If you do get a lawsuit from Wesley Snipes, think of the sales!

libel

This is something I've never encountered, so out of curiosity, I asked my attorney about it. He thought about it a good while, and then said (Probably not an exact quote, but as close as I can remember.) "I have no idea." After another while he added, "I'm really not sure what the courts would say, but it's not something I would risk without very good reason because I can see it landing in court for all sorts of reasons."

Wesley Snipes is uber cool.

kuatolives:
If Trey Parker and Matt Stone can get away with what they get away with, one simple "I'm the great grandson of John Doe" should be able to slip under the radar.

Click to expand...

I think that Trey and Matt can get away with it because what they're doing comes under pastische or satire.

kuatolives:
Well I'll start writing it as I'd envisioned it, but will keep in mind the bloodline might have to be fictionalized at a later point so will not get too specific about the exploits of the great grandfather.

Click to expand...

I don't think there's anything wrong with doing that as a starting point because it can help you keep things straight in your own mind as to motivation, backstory etc. But I do think you'll find that you have to fictionalise it at some point to avoid any obvious references.

Consider, too, that Ned Vizzini's (sp?) Be More Chill undoubtedly sold more copies because the cool presence that invaded his MC's behavior via illegal capsule was Keanu Reeves, and later Eminem, rather than some made-up guys just like them. (I bet a fair number of fans bought it who would otherwise have been uninterested, too.)

When I came out I wondered how the decision to proceed came about and whether the publisher was taking a risk or had checked the legal rights to publish as thoroughly as possible. It seems like such a morass without a clear answer.

Maryn, who wouldn't mind a touch of coolness