When it comes to referencing historical figures, where's the line we shouldn't cross?

Woollybear

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
9,708
Location
USA
My instincts tell me I can refer directly to Plato or Jesus or Genghis Khan in my (futuristic) science fiction. My instincts tell me I should not refer to someone like Joe Biden or Elon Musk in my (futuristic) science fiction.

Where's the line?

I'd like to refer to historical oil, newspaper, and steel magnates from around the world in my science fiction. Diamond tycoons and so on. These are people who have passed away but oftentimes their grandchildren are alive and well.

Is there a clear legal line as to when a historical figure can be referred to in fiction, and when not? (Such a line exists for lyrics, for example, in my understanding. Public domain and so on.)
 

angeliz2k

never mind the shorty
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
3,727
Reaction score
488
Location
Commonwealth of Virginia--it's for lovers
Website
www.elizabethhuhn.com
There are very rarely clear lines in legal matters, and of course we can't give you specific legal advice. I'm not a lawyer. But there are a lot of factors at work, such as whether these people were public figures, what exactly you're saying about them, whether the family is likely to object (remember, the family can sue whether or not they have a strong case), whether you name-check the person without comment, and so on. People can and do write about real historical figures, but writing about more recent historical figures presents potential pitfalls. Writing about Charlemagne is not an issue. Writing about someone's grandfather might.
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,083
Reaction score
10,781
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
Public figures aren't copyrighted the way song lyrics are, so you can certainly refer to them. There are issues of possible defamation, though maybe the line is more blurry for really famous people and politicians? After all, they are attacked, slandered, and the subject of numerous conspiracy theories and blatant falsehoods in real life, and their ability to sue seems limited.

I think there's a risk with referring to someone whose history isn't "finished,"however, because in a few years the work could become highly dated. If you have something, say,premised on Elon Musk founding a space colony and becoming a hero in the future world, but in five years from now he is sentenced to life in prison for murder, it will definitely "date" your work. It's probably safer, for that reason, to create characters in your universe's past that resemble our contemporary personalities but aren't them. Unless political satire is your goal.

Once someone has passed on and their legacy and personal foibles are recorded for posterity, I think it's safer to use them as historical references. We all know where Henry Ford and Edison and Curie and Nixon (just a few examples) ended up in history by now, and that's less likely to undergo dramatic revision in the near future.

There is also the issue of possible defamation, of course. If you create a world built on the assumption that Elon Musk committed massive fraud in our own near future. I'm not sure where the lines is there regarding defamation. There are works that poke fun at famous people via references to personalities or characters with different names but are clearly based on a real person. And the Simpsons Riff on real-life people all the time. There was even an episode back around 2000 with a reference to Donald Trump having eventually been POTUS and leaving the country in a mess (for future POTUS Lisa to clean up). But being a satiricalwork probably gives one more latitude (even if some hyperbolic predictions turn out to be more true than their author thought they would).

I do not think there is any rule or law that would prevent one mentioning a still-living contemporary figure in one's work, however. I've noticed that many authors tend to avoid this, though not all do.

Note I am not a legal expert, so I don't know where the line is with regards to a work of SF that is less than laudatory about a person who is still alive right now.
 

Woollybear

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
9,708
Location
USA
One of things I would try to do is to keep the reference as accurate as possible, using a source considered reliable (or multiple supporting reliable sources).

I also use footnotes in this series, because I love footnotes, and could reference my sources therein. ? I assume this doesn't hurt.

At the moment, John Rockefeller is discussed between two characters. (Interestingly, I had already included Curie and hadn't thought twice about the inclusion--showing my own bias about these individuals.) Curie is given a flattering light by the viewpoint character. Rockefeller is not. (not currently.) Maybe that's what led to a flag in my thoughts.
 
Last edited:

Maryn

Sees All
Staff member
Super Moderator
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
55,448
Reaction score
25,475
Location
Snow Cave
(Point of reference, although I am not a lawyer and we specifically do not give legal advice here: there is no allowed portion of song lyrics that can be used. You are not safe using a single line.)
 

Chris P

Likes metaphors mixed, not stirred
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 4, 2009
Messages
22,619
Reaction score
7,299
Location
Wash., D.C. area
I'm not sure of or qualified to comment on legal issues, but as a reader I have a very low tolerance for real people showing up in fiction as characters. Sure, no problem if 1980s characters go to a Bon Jovi concert and get a hug and autograph backstage from Jon Bon, but having him be a character is too far for me.

I'm not sure why it bugs me so much, but I have two ideas. One is it co-opts the actual person as a tool for the writer. I recently read a story where the MC meets Hemingway in a hotel lobby, and the entire story was so obviously a wish fulfillment of the author, not only meeting Hemingway but also for Hemingway to validate the author's ideas it seemed a really cheap attempt.

The second is that the historical connection often isn't necessary. I read one beautiful, heartfelt love story of a young man in Switzerland stuck in a heart-breakingly dull bureaucratic job, in the early 1900s, named Albert (figured it out yet?) getting his heart broken. The story was gorgeous in its writing and would have stood fully on its own without the historical figure connection. It felt like the writer worried the story wouldn't sell unless there was a "Holy crap, that's Einstein!" twist at the end.

Maybe I don't dislike it so much as dislike it when it is done poorly, but I am very reluctant to take a chance on it.
 

ChaseJxyz

Writes 🏳️‍⚧️🌕🐺 and 🏳️‍⚧️🌕🐺 accessories
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2020
Messages
4,524
Reaction score
6,203
Location
The Rottenest City on the Pacific Coast
Website
www.chasej.xyz
Public figures are treated slightly differently from private citizens in regards to slander/libel/defamation. We've all seen political cartoons and articles saying that [politician] is funded by [billionaire], or that they have dementia, or even that they engage in child trafficking, just look at their red shoes! But if you wrote on your blog about your neighbor engaging in child trafficking that would be a totally different story. At what point someone is a "public figure" is kind of hard to define and would have to be hashed out in court (like the definition of obscenity). But public figures tend to have more money than you and know that they can drag things out and bankrupt you to make you go away, even if they don't have a legal leg to stand on.

How far in the future is your SF? And how realistic does it "need" to be to reality? Even if I was writing a "15 minutes in the future" SF, I would be hesitant to use the names of real people/companies/tech/brands unless they were actually big/inventive or otherwise exceptional, and only then as background info for things that have actually, already happened. There's no guarantee that Musk is going to be the first person to make a space colony, anyone remember Virgin Galactic? I remember writing an essay on SpaceShipOne in high school and how that was going to be the company to bring us to space, now look how dated I am even bringing them up.
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,083
Reaction score
10,781
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
I thought a person could use public domain song lyrics, like those before 1920 or something like this? I get this (mis?)apprehension from sites like this: https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/public-domain/

I am also not a lawyer! :)

I think public domain works are different, but check carefully to make sure something really is in the public domain. It's not based on a set year, but on how long ago the original owner of the rights died, or something like that. I could be wrong, though, not being a copyright expert. So be sure to research this.

Short excerpts of more recent things can be used in scholarly work and critical reviews, but they must be properly cited and referenced. For works of fiction, though, any excerpt something still in copyright muse be done with permission. I think you are allowed to mention the name of a song or novel. For instance, When I walked in, Bob was singing Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven," but you can't write the lyrics out without permission.

But living people are different, even if they are still alive, I believe. Still, you do have to watch for libel and slander, and it can be possible, even if your target isn't famous and if you change the name (I suspect this is the reason for those disclaimers in many books that all characters and situations are fictitious, blah, blah, blah). People who feel a representation is defamatory don't always sue, because doing so can actually be bad PR, plus such suits can be hard to win. BUT any lawsuit is a potential nightmare for a new author without the financial resources to hire a lawyer.

Here's some stuff I found re libel in fiction, so it's an issue people talk about. The take home for me is it's not always open and shut where the line is. I'd personally steer clear of unflattering portrayals of real-life, living people unless the subject of reference is extremely well documented in the public record. Even changing the name of a person doesn't always protect the author if the person has reason to believe your depiction is based on them.

https://www.freedomforuminstitute.o...ts-first-amendment-overview/libel-in-fiction/

https://www.copylaw.org/p/libel-in-fiction.html

https://articles.ibpa-online.org/article/defining-libel-in-fiction/

What is interesting, is works deemed parodies or satirical do enjoy certain protections, which is why (I am guessing) Mad Magazine or The Simpsons can parody movies and celebrities, and why satirical songs (such as Randy Rainbow's videos) that lampoon real people using news clips and altered lyrics to well-known tunes don't get takedown notices or lawsuits.
 
Last edited:

lizmonster

Possibly A Mermaid Queen
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
14,537
Reaction score
24,110
Location
Massachusetts
Website
elizabethbonesteel.com
I think public domain works are different, but check carefully to make sure something really is in the public domain. It's not based on a set year, but on how long ago the original owner of the rights died, or something like that. I could be wrong, though, not being a copyright expert. So be sure to research this.

It also depends on the country. I ran afoul of a piece that was public domain in the US but not the UK.

Lawyer for all of this stuff. Every time.
 

Woollybear

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
9,708
Location
USA
Hmmm.

The inclusion of both Curie and Rockefeller (they are not characters themselves) springs from many things, but fundamentally from a quasi-philosophical discussion between two characters about what sort of historical advance, scientific or otherwise, has ultimately proven to be good. Or ultimately damaging. The characters are arguing the best path forward for their world.

I could certainly massage the arguments on either side to be more along the lines of 'the many scientists who deduced the structure of the atom' and 'the many entrepreneurs who advanced capitalism.' People would 'get it,' but that also is not as satisfyingly pointed as a specific historical instance or two to illustrate either point.

Think think think.
 
Last edited:

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,083
Reaction score
10,781
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
It also depends on the country. I ran afoul of a piece that was public domain in the US but not the UK.

Lawyer for all of this stuff. Every time.

Definitely. And yes, when a novel is going to be published and distributed in different countries, different rules often apply. This is true for defamation and libel guidelines too.

As for people who are dead, libel and defamation don't apply, as I understand it, at least in the US. A person's reputation dies with them.

But that doesn't mean it's always a good idea. As Chris P said, the bar can be higher when the historical figure is an actual character rather than a simple walk on or mentioned in the background of the story. I've read very good novelizations and movies based on the life of real historical people, but it isn't something everyone likes. Once we move out of the realm of consensus information, such as Einstein, or Queen Elizabeth, or whomever did such and such or said such and such on such and such a date, according to documents, we move into speculation about their inner life, what they did in their private time, what their motivations were. I don't have a problem with this, because a narrative of someone's life is rather dull if it's just reporting on what they did and said from without, but it can also grate when the line between plausible fiction that extrapolates from what we know and outright distortions of what we do know becomes blurred.

And yes, it grates on me more when it's done in service of someone's own agenda or ego. I suppose stories about historical figures where they interact with a "wish fulfillment" character is a type of fan fiction, so maybe it's a matter of taste.
 
Last edited:

The Black Prince

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
311
Reaction score
37
Location
Australia
Website
www.adriandeans.com
I am a lawyer but no defamation expert, and yes, the defamation laws can be very different across borders.

Some general principles (bearing in mind I'm in NSW Australia)...this is not advice.

Dead people have no standing to sue in defamation. That's not to say you can't otherwise seriously land yourself in (some kind of) trouble when you slaughter the character of a popular or ex-powerful figure.

Truth is (usually) a defence to a defamation suit.

The context is everything - you write about Joe Famous as a drunk it probably won't matter - but if you portray him as a paedophile/murderer, you may want it checked by legal.
 

Jason

Ideas bounce around in my head
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 26, 2016
Messages
6,011
Reaction score
1,036
Location
Nashville, TN
Where's the line?

Over there somewhere ~~~~~~~~>
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,083
Reaction score
10,781
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
I will admit to a fondness for the occasional historical cameo in fiction in historical settings, particularly when they are someone who doesn't get a lot of exposure. If it leaves someone knowing who Ada Lovelace or Daniel Hale Williams or Grace Hopper or Garret Morgan or Virginia Hall or Mary Bowser were, that's a good thing, IMO.

I remember doing a report on a book about inventors in high school history, and my teacher (who was male) asked why I thought there were no female inventors mentioned in the book. I thought of myself as a feminist, but I hadn't even questioned this, because I had internalized the idea that women were too busy making babies and standing by their men back then to do anything (except for maybe a few suffragists who were trying and get women the vote and a few novelists, like Jane Austin who wrote about stuff that did not speak to the overarching human condition, only women's matters). I didn't ask myself why all the inventors were also white males until much later, I am afraid.
 

GeoWriter

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
146
Reaction score
13
If it leaves someone knowing who Ada Lovelace or Daniel Hale Williams or Grace Hopper or Garret Morgan or Virginia Hall or Mary Bowser were, that's a good thing, IMO.

A cameo by lesser-known real characters works ok for me, but I typically cringe when famous historical figures--or figures who are still alive--are introduced. My concern is not for legal issues so much as not feeling comfortable with blurring fiction with fictionalized interpretations of real people. For living figures especially, the interpretation may take on the mantle of an evaluative or even politicized viewpoint, either intentional or not, that yanks me from the story.
 

Beccorban

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 13, 2020
Messages
73
Reaction score
3
Location
London
I would suggest steering clear of anyone alive and well (or unwell, for that matter), although it depends entirely upon the genre of your book.