I have written several short stories centered on my hometown. While I have been careful not to use the actual names of people, but still used the names of actual places.
My question is this. Can I use the name of my actual town without fear of being sued by the city? My tales are horror in nature and are not generally flattering to my hometown. I realize that I cannot use the name of the mayor, but if I have a fictional mayor doing stupid acts how dangerous is that for me legally?
Also, how dangerous is it for me to use actual product names? Can I say he drank a Coke or Pepsi? I recall Kevin Smith talking about how he was writing a Green Arrow comic book and wanted one of the characters to discuss Strawberry Shortcake (the children’s toy) and WB forced him to call the toy Blueberry Pancakes.
The city cannot (successfuly) sue you for writing fictional events in it. You can feel free to use actual product names, too. If you get famous, demand product placement contracts!
There is no way to make yourself litigation-proof. But lawsuits are great publicity! Be sure and send press releases to everyone!
Seriously, the city probably won’t sue you, but you might be ostracized. Then again, you might be voted the next mayor. If you invent a city, though, you can also invent things like extreme weather and winning sports teams, blow up the water towers, and burn the high school down.
For it to be libel, it has to contain false information about a material fact. For public figures, they also have to prove you knew the information was false yet published it anyway.
If say the mayor is a child molester, it’s possible grounds for libel. If you say the mayor has the morals of a child molester, it is not (since you’re voicing an opinion, not stating a fact). If you say a big, slavering monster was biting off the toes of children and the mayor was helpless to do anything, it’s not libel, since there is no fact involved.
As far as product names are concerned, you can use them any way you want. Companies may complain about it, but there is such a thing as freedom of speech. They may write a letter if you misuse their trademark (e.g., “she reached for a kleenex.”), but they won’t sue you over it.
The Kevin Smith case was just lawyers getting nervous, or perhaps a blanket company policy against using trademarks. There’s nothing to prevent him from using the trademark.
Now, of course, people can sue you for anything they want to sue you for. However, it’s highly unlikely they can win a case, or even would bother to go to court over it.
Law and Order was sued by Gary Condits wife based on an episode that was very similar to the Chandra Levy case. Characters similar to Condit and his wife were in the fictional story, and the wife was the killer in the episode.
L&O now has a disclaimer that similarities to real events are unintended, etc.
Your question really goes to whether a purported fictional statement can be libelous. In fact, you suggest your story is actually about real persons, but you are only disguising it. There is no clear line in black letter libel law - that line is probably drawn differently by all 50 states. However, I would assume your statements can be actionable (you can get sued) if they are false. Of course, truth is a defense.
If you are stupid enough to write libelous things about an individual so thinly disguised that the individual is immediately recognizable to the ordinary citizen (say a group of twelve of your peers on a jury), you may get into trouble.
Don’t take a real life mayor named Madison Franklin and call him Frank Madison. Don’t take his lovely wife June and call her July. Don’t take his day job as an Allstate insurance representative and give him employment at EveryCounty. Or at least don’t do it if you make him guilty of both mopery and dopery.
Although these are ludicrous examples, there have been real life cases where the disguise was nearly as transparent, and these have gotten authors into trouble.
It is much harder to libel a public figure since the standards are different, and you say you aren’t planning on copying real people so you should be in no trouble. Real places are never a problem. I just wanted to remind lurkers that you don’t have infinite latitude just because you’re writing fiction.
L&O has had that disclaimer on it since it began. Most/all works of fiction include a disclaimer along the lines of “This is a work of fiction. Any similarity to actual events or persons living or dead is unintentional and coincidental.” L&O has on at least one occasion that I’ve seen added an additional disclaimer, in an ep that bore a strong resemblance to a child abuse case in NYC (Joel Stein I think was the name?). It specifically deliniated the differences between the L&O story and the actual case.
I’m not dumb enough to use real people in my tales, no matter how heavily or thinly they are disguised. Nor do I plan on using events that happened in the area and L&O style.
I just wanted to make sure that if I portrayed the mayor of London, Ohio as an idiot that I wouldn’t be able to sue me so long as I made it clear that the real mayor and the fictional one are two very seperate people.
I just don’t want kleenex jumping me for making a kleenex monster or something.
See, in my area we have some distinctive buildings and businesses. I would love to say an even happened at the Willows Inn, but if I should make it the Lone Pine Buffet then I will.
I just want to know what is safe to do and what isn’t.
Identifiable businesses fall under the same rule as identifiable people. As long as you aren’t portraying the Willows Inn as a rat-infested, cholera-ridden hangout for Satanists who chop up babies for the stew you can certainly mention it as a landmark, have people eat or meet there, etc.
We’ve had a publisher remove brand names from a book. The editor said she knew it was being hyper-cautious but they felt it was not a big deal to use cereal as opposed to a real brand name. They also insisted on major changes to a minor character who was recognisably a well-known NZ TV presenter even though there was nothing objectionable in the description.
We’ve had a publisher remove brand names from a book. The editor said she knew it was being hyper-cautious but they felt it was not a big deal to use cereal as opposed to a real brand name. They also insisted on major changes to a minor character who was recognisably a well-known NZ TV presenter even though there was nothing objectionable in the description.