Take the 2-minute tour ×
Writers Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for authors, editors, reviewers, professional writers, and aspiring writers. It's 100% free, no registration required.

What are the legalities of taking something currently in the news and writing a story/novel/movie (but not a documentary/biography) about it? Take Snowden, for example. Someone went and made a movie (I haven't seen it - apparently it's awful).

Do you need permission from the people involved or mentioned to write about them? Could you get into trouble for libel even if you make it very clear that you're writing fiction and insisting that any resemblance... is a coincidence?

share|improve this question
    
Not a duplicate, but some of these answers may be useful: writers.stackexchange.com/questions/2555/… and writers.stackexchange.com/questions/5808/… –  Lauren Ipsum Jul 31 '13 at 16:28
add comment

2 Answers

I am not a lawyer, but...

Defamation requires 1. A defamatory statement 2. About a recognizable individual that is 3. published. Slander, the verbal equivalent of libel, also has requirement for actual damage to result, something you don't have to show for libel.

Starting at the beginning, what is a defamatory statement? This is basically anything that would tend tarnish the person's reputation and make it difficult for them to interact with others. Specifically, the sort of damages that the courts look for are the withdrawal or the withholding of opportunities the person would normally enjoy. Therefore, the slanderous statement is one that induces such withdrawal or withholding. It's no good to claim the statement was an opinion or even a quote from someone else, it's still defamatory for you to say.

Some statements, such as imputing criminal acts, infidelity, or loathsome disease to an individual are considered per se defamatory, that is defamatory without any other discussion. Other statements may only be considered defamatory given the circumstances of the statement. In your example, Snowden is accused of a crime, which is per se defamatory. Even assuming you're only using him as an example, I suspect the case you're talking about will still fall under the per se interpretation.

Which leads to the second element, who is a recognizable individual? This is the element TV always slips in the "Any resemblance between the events of this story and individuals alive or dead are entirely coincidental" line for. By explicitly stating the story is not about person X gives the author greater leeway when they later claim the story, well, is not about person X. This isn't a license to then actually make the story about person X, but it indicates a good faith effort to use the idea of the event and not the specific facts.

For example, it would be impossible to write about a black teen shot by a white neighborhood watchman at the moment without calling to mind the Zimmerman trial. But if you change key elements (make the teen younger or older, make the watchman female, set the events during a clear day instead of a rainy night, etc.), you break that automatic connection. It's still possible to imagine what might happen, just so long as you make it clear you aren't talking about what did happen. No amount of "This is fiction" labeling is going to let you say, "And then George Zimmerman did..."

The final element, publication, just means someone else heard (or read) your defamatory statement and understood it. There is debate in the courts as to whether that means they understood the statement or they understood the statement was defamatory. Either way, the whole purpose of a story or a novel is for other people to understand it, so it will likely be impossible to fight this element unless you write the story for yourself and then delete it without showing it to anyone.

If you are at all unsure about the law in your area, consult a lawyer before showing your writing to anyone.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Here's a story of a ruling that could (inadvertently?) affect the use of actual people (or characters who merely resemble actual people):

http://io9.com/this-court-ruling-could-wreck-the-future-of-realistic-s-995447426

share|improve this answer
    
Your link doesn't include the case name, which is always a red flag in any article about a legal case. The opinion is IN RE: NCAA STUDENT-ATHLETE NAME & LIKENESS LICENSING LITIGATION, the case is Keller v. EA out of the 9th circuit. –  Lazarus Aug 6 '13 at 19:32
    
This case has a fairly narrow ruling in that it involves taking a readily identifiable public figure and depicting them in the exact environment for which they are famous. For example, in Keller, a EA wrote a football video game that used the likeness, background, jersey number, etc. of a college football player. The court's ruling ensures that if someone is going to benefit from that likeness, it should be the player himself, not the third party EA. –  Lazarus Aug 6 '13 at 19:36
    
To avoid running afoul of this ruling, you only have to do one of two things. One, make the character inherently different from the real individual. For example, create a game player with Keller's stats, but a different background, appearance, and jersey. The second approach is to take a different but identifiable person and put them in a vastly different environment. So, football player number 9 from XYZ, Kansas, and how he reacted to the alien invasion. –  Lazarus Aug 6 '13 at 19:39
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.