Legalities about a true story

H

happyslug

New member
Hello everyone my first post.

In WWII something happened to my grandfather - and he died.

The incident involved a number of people - many died - two survived.

The two survivors died in peace time.

One wrote a book about the experience (approx 1955)

So I have researched the story from

a) the book
b) a TV documentary
c) news paper cuttings - some from the time and some over the years
d) the Internet
e) speaking with the son of one of the survivors

I have so far researched for personal reasons.

However during the research I have realised it would make a very good screenplay.

So where do I stand?
 
I'm not an authority on the subject of copyright, but as long as you didn't use the book as the primary source and as long as the script isn't too much like the book you should be okay. Basically if it looks like you used the book's plot as your script's plot structure and if you lifted specific lines from the book then you might get into hot water.

I would try to see if the rights are available for the book and if they are not too expensive just to cover yourself. If the rights aren't available or are too much, then if your script is mostly based off of the history and not the book then don't mention the book until you can get the rights.

I would try to get written permission from the son pertaining to his statement. If he was willing to be interviewed about it then he should be cool with letting you use the information towards writing the script. This way he can't come back later and claim you took his statement and didn't compensate him.

Since this is a historical event I think you should be fine without having to get any rights to a book or TV documentary. For example, look at Pearl Harbor. I doubt anyone would need to obtain the rights to the event to write about it. Only if the writer wants to base their script off a specific account or book.
 
Thanks for quick response

Thanks for quick response

I haven't started on the screenplay as yet - got the idea in my mind and can see it as a movie.

I read the book about 10 years ago so if I write a screenplay it won't be based on the book as such.

Maybe if I write the screenplay draft first, and then re-read the book to get the facts straight might be the best idea. Then it won't be a film version of a book.

Also the book I believe has been out of print for some time.

You say "Only if the writer wants to base their script off a specific account or book" - as there were only two survivors the events are only their versions (or one of the two in particular)
 
Last edited:
That's true, you might want to elaborate on the other POV's of the people that didn't survive the event.

If you are not using the book as the basis for your screenplay then you're fine. I could go and write a script about Alexander the Great and use historical documents and writings for my research, even though there are other books, films, and novels written about Alexander the Great as well. Same thing with a lot of historical events or mythology as well.
 
Well, you need a lawyer.

Anything that at least 3 of your sources share is fair game - that would be considered a "fact". Anything that is *only* in one of the sources you can't use without buying the rights to that source. Anything *you* discovered through your interviews is *yours*.

A book, even a book about a factual incident, is the result of research and interviews and hard work on the part of the writer of that book... and that work is copyrighted, and the writer expects to be paid for their work. If you do the exact same work and uncover the same information on your own (and can prove this if the writer sues you), you have done the work, so you don't need to pay for the book writer's work. Copyright is all about paying people for the work they have done. So, if at any time you use someone else's work - even if it is their research on a true story - you need to pay them for that work.

I had a true story that happened in my home town, and I did all of the leg work myself and ignored the one book on the subject. I also read all of the newspaper accounts - and anything that they all agreed one I figured was a fact, and not *exclusive* to that reporter. The worst thing - the book had an exclusive interview with a survivor that I was unable to use, unless I paid for it. So, it wasn't in my story.

One thing that might help you with the newspaper stuff is that it's WW2, and copyright law at that time was 28 years, renewable for another 28... and newspapers were not going to renew old news. So you can probably use the newspaper stories.

But, you probably need a lawyer - not some writer trying to dodge work for a few minutes by answering questions on a message board.

- Bill
 
wcmartell said:
Well, you need a lawyer.
Click to expand...
ALWAYS good advice.

That aside, as long as you're using public sources and/or personal sources with releases, you should be okay. Your grandfather is okay but with the others it depends upon their heirs...generally, unless it's in the public domain.
 
wcmartell said:
Well, you need a lawyer.
Click to expand...

This is definitely not a bad idea at all. Maybe an entertainment attorney would know all the ins and outs of this type of situation.

I have a question about this writer's problem as well... namely what if he uses all public domain sources and his own research / interviews and still ends up with a script that resembles the contents of the book? Since this is history and not a fictional story, would the writer of the book about this historical event still have grounds for legal action? I would think that they wouldn't, but I am curious as to what others know about this aspect of the issue.
 
Well, the book writer could sue - anyone can sue about anything - but if you were able to show that you used PD sources and your own research, you would probably win without problem... or they'd drop their suit. You can't own history. You *can* own the work and research you did to uncover history.

In my case, I had a couple of eye witnesses that I had interviewed... but the book had someone who was closer to the event than either of the people I talked to - and this guy had juicy details I wish I could have used. But the book writer's eye witness had recently died. No way to get that interview myself... so thise details were left out of the story. Those details may have happened or may not have happened - I couldn't establish them as facts because there was only the one source who saw them.

Story worked fine without those details.

- Bill
 
If those two survivors are at the center of your story or figure prominently therein, you will likely need to secure their life story rights. It could be less expensive than you think and you'll want to consult an entertainment attorney before moving too far into the project.

e
 
Erik Olson said:
If those two survivors are at the center of your story or figure prominently therein, you will likely need to secure their life story rights. It could be less expensive than you think and you'll want to consult an entertainment attorney before moving too far into the project.

e
Click to expand...
Good advice, Erik. :thumbsup:
 
Would I really need their life story rights? Even though its an event which last a matter of days?

Also the story wont focus on one or two individuals but the group as a whole.

Just a reminder, the surivors are now deceased. Does that affect the life story rights.
 
The life story rights are not transferable - meaning the heirs cannot generally sue over matters like defamation. You might, by taking the step to secure the life rights from the estate or next-of-kin, gain access to pertinent, confidential information not otherwise in the public domain.

I think you're okay, but again, an attorney will help you definitively answer these questions before you get too far along.

e
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top