Publishing Book Legally

thejourney

Can someone clear up a few points in terms of the law and publishing. I checked my crap old law book and the internet and can't get much on laws of publishing.

Person A wants to publish a book on Person B based on their strange life. Would make a great book.

Person B has lived a strange life. They held a public position as a teacher, lots of money and social status. The person B lived abroad and things went bad and the person went to jail for stealing from students in a first world country outside of Ireland. The court case was held and Person B went to jail for 3 years. Person B are now back in Ireland working as teacher. There rise from nothing to the top back to the bottom.

If Person A writes a book based on True events. Inspired by the life of person B



Is this legal?

If they don't use name, change country and don't relate it back to the person.
Add in bits for extra material for drama

Mr. Incognito

Depends.

Are you person A? If so it wont sell if you cant use there and their in a sentence

Secondly if B is identifiable then A could be sued for defamation, which seems to be the motivation here.

thejourney

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Depends.

Are you person A? If so it wont sell if you cant use there and their in a sentence

Secondly if B is identifiable then A could be sued for defamation, which seems to be the motivation here.

No, I never plan to write book learning about the law.

What does term 'identifiable' mean under Irish law?

Mr. Incognito

It means that someone could identify the person from the information presented

thejourney

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

It means that someone could identify the person from the information presented

I suppose the issue here is a few things.


The story is already in parts in the newspapers about the court case. So reporting that would be true. Correct?

The rest of the story like early years would not be public knowledge. Correct?


What the person is doing now again is true information as the people can see person B working now as a teacher. Correct?


So you could write a story inspired by "person B's life" but change the all the information that identifies person B to the public.

The problem is no one has committed the same type of crimes "Person B" committed so its obvious who the person is. Its not just your average robber more like a con man?

Peregrinus

You're on thin ice.

If somebody reading the book is going to think "character X is obviously a thinly-disguised version of person B", then person B can say that the book is going to be understood to be about him. And, if the book is defamatory, it's defamatory of him.

Manach

So long as an author sticks to factual material there should not be an issue (truth being a defence), at least given the number of biographies that are currently available?

Peregrinus

It's not clear whether thejourney is contemplating a biography/current events book, presented as a true account of things that actually happened, including some behind-the-scenes stuff, or a novel based on or inspired by true events. (In the OP he does mention adding "extra material for drama"; that might suggest a novel.)

If the former, everything he writes obviously refers to B and the reader is expected to believe that it is true. If so, he needs to be very sure of his behind-the-scenes stuff, and he needs to make sure that he can evidence it if challenged.

He'd also need to think about things other than defamation of B. Is any of the behind-the-scenes information, for example, confidential? Was it improperly obtained? Could it be defamatory of someone other than B?

If it's a novel he has more leeway, since there's understood to be a large amount of creativity, even in a novel which is an exploration of true events. In 1989 John Banville published The Book of Evidence which is very clearly inspired by the murders committed by Malcolm McArthur in 1982, though much of the detail is changed. The protagonist and narrator of the novel is one "Freddy Montgomery", plainly modelled on Malcolm McArthur. The picture painted of the Montgomery/McArthur character is, unsurprisingly, not a flattering one. McArthur never sued and, as a convicted murderer of considerable notoriety, he would have been hard put to say that anything Banville wrote might have brought his reputation any lower than it already was. But if he had sued, Banville (among other defences, would have pointed to obviously fictional elements in the novel and would argue that the ordinary reader of the novel would understand perfectly well that what Banville writes about Montgomery is not to be taken as necessarily applying to, or true of, McArthur.

The difference is best illustrated when we consider Evelyn Waugh's Officers and Gentlemen (1955), which includes a fictionalised version of the Battle for Crete in 1941 (in which Waugh participated). The account reflects very badly on certain senior officers of the British forces, who are easily identifiable even though they are given fictionalised names. None of the people concerned sued. Waugh's diaries covering the period were published in 1976; they basically confirm the fictionalised account of the battle, and name the officers concerned, but by then all were dead (as was Waugh). It's doubtful if any publisher would have published Waugh's diary in 1955, but he could get away with publishing the same account as a novel.

nuckeythompson

Wait till person B dies

thejourney

nuckeythompson wrote: »

Wait till person B dies

The man is 77 years old now.

thejourney

Peregrinus wrote: »

It's not clear whether thejourney is contemplating a biography/current events book, presented as a true account of things that actually happened, including some behind-the-scenes stuff, or a novel based on or inspired by true events. (In the OP he does mention adding "extra material for drama"; that might suggest a novel.)

If the former, everything he writes obviously refers to B and the reader is expected to believe that it is true. If so, he needs to be very sure of his behind-the-scenes stuff, and he needs to make sure that he can evidence it if challenged.

He'd also need to think about things other than defamation of B. Is any of the behind-the-scenes information, for example, confidential? Was it improperly obtained? Could it be defamatory of someone other than B?

If it's a novel he has more leeway, since there's understood to be a large amount of creativity, even in a novel which is an exploration of true events. In 1989 John Banville published The Book of Evidence which is very clearly inspired by the murders committed by Malcolm McArthur in 1982, though much of the detail is changed. The protagonist and narrator of the novel is one "Freddy Montgomery", plainly modelled on Malcolm McArthur. The picture painted of the Montgomery/McArthur character is, unsurprisingly, not a flattering one. McArthur never sued and, as a convicted murderer of considerable notoriety, he would have been hard put to say that anything Banville wrote might have brought his reputation any lower than it already was. But if he had sued, Banville (among other defences, would have pointed to obviously fictional elements in the novel and would argue that the ordinary reader of the novel would understand perfectly well that what Banville writes about Montgomery is not to be taken as necessarily applying to, or true of, McArthur.

The difference is best illustrated when we consider Evelyn Waugh's Officers and Gentlemen (1955), which includes a fictionalised version of the Battle for Crete in 1941 (in which Waugh participated). The account reflects very badly on certain senior officers of the British forces, who are easily identifiable even though they are given fictionalised names. None of the people concerned sued. Waugh's diaries covering the period were published in 1976; they basically confirm the fictionalised account of the battle, and name the officers concerned, but by then all were dead (as was Waugh). It's doubtful if any publisher would have published Waugh's diary in 1955, but he could get away with publishing the same account as a novel.

OP would like to clairify that the book is not a biography/current events book. This would need to be written by researching a person or story.

The book would be more like the wolf of wall street type. Popular fiction based in true events

Yes, so I would assume its called a novel then, right?

nuac

thejourney wrote: »

The man is 77 years old now.

)

That is no age nowadays ( said he optimistically )

Victor

thejourney wrote: »

The story is already in parts in the newspapers about the court case. So reporting that would be true. Correct?

Did the newspaper(s) report the case correctly. Are you using a direct quote from the paper? Are you certain you transcribed it correctly? Can you be sure the sub-editor / editor won't make an error?

If so, how can you deny this is the specific person?

nuckeythompson

Victor wrote:

Did the newspaper(s) report the case correctly. Are you using a direct quote from the paper? Are you certain you transcribed it correctly? Can you be sure the sub-editor / editor won't make an error?

Victor wrote:

If so, how can you deny this is the specific person?

Did the papers name the teacher?

Losty Dublin

Most decent publishing houses will legally vet books for potential libellous material as well as copyright, obscenity/blasphemies etc. Retailers and distributors may also think twice about carrying any such contentious works though such decisions will be more so commercially led.

Based on the little that OP has mentioned, I can't see the book getting beyond Control-Save in Microsoft Word