Results 1 to 18 of 18
-
2014-10-26, 11:38 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- Gothenburg, Sweden
- Gender
A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
Assuming Richard III was resurrected - and I accept that you may not be lawyers - do you think he could sue to ban the play on grounds of libel?
Avatar by CoffeeIncluded
Oooh, and that's a bad miss.
Don't exercise your freedom of speech until you have exercised your freedom of thought.
― Tim Fargo
-
2014-10-26, 01:13 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
- Location
- Cippa's River Meadow
- Gender
-
2014-10-26, 02:39 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Location
- Dallas, TX
- Gender
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
Warning: this answer is based on U.S. Law. I'm assuming that he is suing to ban the play in the U.S.
And libel laws are state laws. He has 50 different versions of the suit to file. And thousands of suits in each state. Libel is against somebody who has libeled you. He can sue somebody who has performed it, but not somebody who is planning to do so. (If he wins, nobody else will perform it, but that's not "su[ing] to ban the play on grounds of libel.")
It's a definitive defense to libel if the statements are true. So step one is to prove that he didn't do what the play claims. If he cannot provide definitive proof, then he cannot win in court. And all the evidence is 400 years gone, so I suspect that answers the question.
If he is not a hunchback, of course, and walks into the courtroom, he has a potential case.
An interesting question comes up - when the play is performed, is it slander or libel?
Also, he must prove that he has been harmed by it. Not by Shakespeare writing, Not by Holinshed's Chronicles, the history book the facts were taken from, but by a particular production of it. And he can't. Nobody has denied him a job, or treated him badly, because that play was shown in Dallas in 2011 (or whatever).
Princess Irina Yusupov sued MGM in 1933 for a false characterization, and won. Since then, movies have usually had some version of the following disclaimer: "All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental."
This was used for The Social Network:
"While this story is inspired by actual events, certain characters, characterizations, incidents, locations and dialogue were fictionalized or invented for purposes of dramatization. With respect to such fictionalization or invention, any similarity to the name or to the actual character or history of any person, living or dead, or any product or entity or actual incident is entirely for dramatic purposes and not intended to reflect on any actual character, history, product or entity."
So in America, it would probably all be waved away as "dramatic license".
I assume that if the issue came up, all future productions would use a similar model. "This play was written by William Shakespeare based on the accounts of Holinshed. We present it as a work of fiction, and all characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental."
-
2014-10-26, 07:18 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Location
- Bristol
- Gender
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
He'd almost certainly sue in England, of course, since not only is that his native jurisdiction and where the play was written, but also has one of the more punitive libel regimes around to the point where defamation tourism is actually a thing.
Here, the defence would have to prove that the play was not written/staged with the intention of damaging the reputation of the individual, and so forth. Until very recently (last year) it wasn't even a defence to defamation that the statement in question was true. The defence could try fair comment or public interest but that's going to be quite hard given how long ago the events occurred. Moreover it's one of the few areas of law where the burden of proof rests by default on the defendant rather than the claimant, so he has an advantage right out of the gate: he doesn't have to prove that events didn't occur like that; the party being charged would have to prove that it didn't.
Since then, movies have usually had some version of the following disclaimer: "All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental."Last edited by Aedilred; 2014-10-26 at 07:20 PM.
GITP Blood Bowl Manager Cup
Red Sabres - Season I Cup Champions, two-time Cup Semifinalists
Anlec Razors - Two-time Cup Semifinalists
Bad Badenhof Bats - Season VII Cup Champions
League Wiki
Spoiler: Previous Avatars(by Strawberries)
(by Rain Dragon)
-
2014-10-26, 08:25 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Gender
-
2014-10-26, 09:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Location
- Bristol
- Gender
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
I think the public interest defence would apply in that case; that citizens should know the law (or be able to know the law) is of course a fundamental component of the rule of law.
'sides, I didn't say it was a bad thing. A lot of people have made a lot of money out of the E&W libel laws. Especially lawyers...GITP Blood Bowl Manager Cup
Red Sabres - Season I Cup Champions, two-time Cup Semifinalists
Anlec Razors - Two-time Cup Semifinalists
Bad Badenhof Bats - Season VII Cup Champions
League Wiki
Spoiler: Previous Avatars(by Strawberries)
(by Rain Dragon)
-
2014-10-26, 10:07 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
Zz'dtri has a comment. http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0789.html
-
2014-10-27, 12:52 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2011
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
That isn't true in Britain. Sometimes it isn't even true in America.
Last edited by enderlord99; 2014-10-27 at 01:05 AM.
I use braces (also known as "curly brackets") to indicate sarcasm. If there are none present, I probably believe what I am saying; should it turn out to be inaccurate trivia, please tell me rather than trying to play along with an apparent joke I don't know I'm making.
-
2014-10-27, 02:59 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
- Location
- Cippa's River Meadow
- Gender
-
2014-10-27, 04:57 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- Gothenburg, Sweden
- Gender
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
In Sweden he might have a case. My lawyering-expertise is limited to 3 minutes on Wikipedia, but he would probably lose the case. Swedish courts give very wide berth to matters of freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
Avatar by CoffeeIncluded
Oooh, and that's a bad miss.
Don't exercise your freedom of speech until you have exercised your freedom of thought.
― Tim Fargo
-
2014-10-27, 07:50 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2007
- Location
- Some say he's in Scotland
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
I really can't see how this isn't a question of legal request, even if it's posed as a 'hypothetical' question.
it's still asking for interpretation of real-world law, which would, i would think, be not appropriate for the boards.
Also, I'd assume Richard III would have more pressing issues that trying to sue a person that's been dead for centuries.
-
2014-10-27, 08:46 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Location
- Wisconsin, USA
- Gender
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
Just the kind of crazy hypothetical stuff I find amusing.
He might be able to turn a decent profit by claiming product identity on himself and obtaining royalties from all productions, film showings, etc. involving him, at least those that are entertainment oriented and not documentaries. IANAL, however.
"The royal royalties have just been paid into your checking account, Mr. Plantagenet."Spoiler
So the song runs on, with shift and change,
Through the years that have no name,
And the late notes soar to a higher range,
But the theme is still the same.
Man's battle-cry and the guns' reply
Blend in with the old, old rhyme
That was traced in the score of the strata marks
While millenniums winked like campfire sparks
Down the winds of unguessed time. -- 4th Stanza, The Bad Lands, Badger Clark
-
2014-10-27, 01:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
That appears to have been removed upon request because the estate was offended and the game makers decided to be nice, not necessarily because the estate was going to win its case, a point upon which I have no comment.
It's not. It's like talking about the xkcd what-if where he ends by noting that somebody riding around with an ax at midnight can be detained by police. Or an Annie Liebovitz parody image.
Spoiler: NSFW, but really culturally interesting if you look into it
The discussion has no bearing on providing advice to any actual person or issue.
But I bet people would be lining up to represent the newly revived Richard III. Just think of the positive reviews if you won his case!
-
2014-10-27, 02:44 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Location
- Bristol
- Gender
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
He wouldn't be able to sue Shakespeare (or Shakespeare's estate) in any case as the limitation period would have expired centuries ago. He could still go after modern productions of it, though.
GITP Blood Bowl Manager Cup
Red Sabres - Season I Cup Champions, two-time Cup Semifinalists
Anlec Razors - Two-time Cup Semifinalists
Bad Badenhof Bats - Season VII Cup Champions
League Wiki
Spoiler: Previous Avatars(by Strawberries)
(by Rain Dragon)
-
2014-10-28, 07:02 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Location
- Dallas, TX
- Gender
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
Sure he would, but that doesn't affect the US. He has to sue people putting on the play, wherever they are putting it on.
And in the U.S., he would have to show what harm this production has caused him. People putting on a play in 2014 are not responsible for any pain caused in the 16th-20th centuries.
Since he's a public figure, he'd also have to show that they did it with intent to harm him, which is obviously false. (They don't know he still exists.)
-
2014-10-28, 08:51 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2011
- Location
- An Abyssal Tower
- Gender
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
The real question here is... Would he be able to sue Shakespeare if we brought him back to life as well?
Mauve Shirt, Savannah, Gnomish Wanderer, Cuthalion and Smuchmuch get cookies for making me avatars. (::)
(::) Current avatar by Smuchmuch (::)
Co Founder of LUTAS - For all your less than useful heroes out there.
My Deviant Art. Careful, it's full of ponies.
Dragons!
-
2014-10-28, 10:30 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Location
- Wisconsin, USA
- Gender
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
Or if he still had his 15th century personality, would he just go looking for the Swan of Avon, battle-axe in hand?
(Actually, feudal lords tended to be remarkably litigious as well as warlike, so lawyers are as likely as hewing, if not more so. But it makes a better question for purposes of silly amusement, IMO. And there's a chance he really would try to find him to kill him, probably. )Spoiler
So the song runs on, with shift and change,
Through the years that have no name,
And the late notes soar to a higher range,
But the theme is still the same.
Man's battle-cry and the guns' reply
Blend in with the old, old rhyme
That was traced in the score of the strata marks
While millenniums winked like campfire sparks
Down the winds of unguessed time. -- 4th Stanza, The Bad Lands, Badger Clark
-
2014-10-28, 11:36 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2005
- Gender
Re: A hypothetical question on libel in fiction (Shakespeare)
Sheriff: Please give the Inappropriate Topics a wide berth. This thread does get into giving legal advice and real world politics.