Can someone publish a story that happened to you?












23















Can someone take a story that happened to you, without your knowledge, and publish it? Using your name and specifics, and take the copyright for it?



A person, whose mother lived in our small town, heard a story about our father. This person wrote a children's book based on the story, using his name and other specifics to the story, and had it published with out our knowledge. She copyrighted the work. Is that legal? Do we have any rights to the story since it was about our father?










share|improve this question




















  • 8





    might be a better question for Law.SE, still I think it might be on-topic here too

    – DJ Spicy Deluxe
    Apr 25 at 3:20






  • 2





    I would say... The question might be legal in nature.. but the answer is one that is of general interest to this forum.

    – ashleylee
    Apr 25 at 22:16






  • 4





    Related from the author's perspective: Do I need permission from people I am writing about if I am writing about a true story that was reported in the media?

    – Andrew T.
    Apr 26 at 1:51






  • 2





    Related: What are my legal rights if somebody writes a book about me without my consent?

    – Philipp
    Apr 26 at 8:59






  • 6





    The answers below cover the legal issues, but I'd like to point out a possible pragmatic solution if the book is fairly popular, and, as you say, uses your father's actual name and identifying informaton (let's say it's Bob Bobson). Practically, it might be far easier (and still highly lucrative) to collaborate with a writer and release your version of the story, marketed as "the true story of Bob Bobson!" The author's audience might be eager to read more about their favorite "character." You won't be able to get money directly from the author, but you will be able to use their success.

    – Obie 2.0
    Apr 26 at 9:00


















23















Can someone take a story that happened to you, without your knowledge, and publish it? Using your name and specifics, and take the copyright for it?



A person, whose mother lived in our small town, heard a story about our father. This person wrote a children's book based on the story, using his name and other specifics to the story, and had it published with out our knowledge. She copyrighted the work. Is that legal? Do we have any rights to the story since it was about our father?










share|improve this question




















  • 8





    might be a better question for Law.SE, still I think it might be on-topic here too

    – DJ Spicy Deluxe
    Apr 25 at 3:20






  • 2





    I would say... The question might be legal in nature.. but the answer is one that is of general interest to this forum.

    – ashleylee
    Apr 25 at 22:16






  • 4





    Related from the author's perspective: Do I need permission from people I am writing about if I am writing about a true story that was reported in the media?

    – Andrew T.
    Apr 26 at 1:51






  • 2





    Related: What are my legal rights if somebody writes a book about me without my consent?

    – Philipp
    Apr 26 at 8:59






  • 6





    The answers below cover the legal issues, but I'd like to point out a possible pragmatic solution if the book is fairly popular, and, as you say, uses your father's actual name and identifying informaton (let's say it's Bob Bobson). Practically, it might be far easier (and still highly lucrative) to collaborate with a writer and release your version of the story, marketed as "the true story of Bob Bobson!" The author's audience might be eager to read more about their favorite "character." You won't be able to get money directly from the author, but you will be able to use their success.

    – Obie 2.0
    Apr 26 at 9:00
















23












23








23


1






Can someone take a story that happened to you, without your knowledge, and publish it? Using your name and specifics, and take the copyright for it?



A person, whose mother lived in our small town, heard a story about our father. This person wrote a children's book based on the story, using his name and other specifics to the story, and had it published with out our knowledge. She copyrighted the work. Is that legal? Do we have any rights to the story since it was about our father?










share|improve this question
















Can someone take a story that happened to you, without your knowledge, and publish it? Using your name and specifics, and take the copyright for it?



A person, whose mother lived in our small town, heard a story about our father. This person wrote a children's book based on the story, using his name and other specifics to the story, and had it published with out our knowledge. She copyrighted the work. Is that legal? Do we have any rights to the story since it was about our father?







copyright legal children






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Apr 25 at 4:23









Cyn

22.9k150107




22.9k150107










asked Apr 25 at 1:49









Juli RidgwayJuli Ridgway

11613




11613








  • 8





    might be a better question for Law.SE, still I think it might be on-topic here too

    – DJ Spicy Deluxe
    Apr 25 at 3:20






  • 2





    I would say... The question might be legal in nature.. but the answer is one that is of general interest to this forum.

    – ashleylee
    Apr 25 at 22:16






  • 4





    Related from the author's perspective: Do I need permission from people I am writing about if I am writing about a true story that was reported in the media?

    – Andrew T.
    Apr 26 at 1:51






  • 2





    Related: What are my legal rights if somebody writes a book about me without my consent?

    – Philipp
    Apr 26 at 8:59






  • 6





    The answers below cover the legal issues, but I'd like to point out a possible pragmatic solution if the book is fairly popular, and, as you say, uses your father's actual name and identifying informaton (let's say it's Bob Bobson). Practically, it might be far easier (and still highly lucrative) to collaborate with a writer and release your version of the story, marketed as "the true story of Bob Bobson!" The author's audience might be eager to read more about their favorite "character." You won't be able to get money directly from the author, but you will be able to use their success.

    – Obie 2.0
    Apr 26 at 9:00
















  • 8





    might be a better question for Law.SE, still I think it might be on-topic here too

    – DJ Spicy Deluxe
    Apr 25 at 3:20






  • 2





    I would say... The question might be legal in nature.. but the answer is one that is of general interest to this forum.

    – ashleylee
    Apr 25 at 22:16






  • 4





    Related from the author's perspective: Do I need permission from people I am writing about if I am writing about a true story that was reported in the media?

    – Andrew T.
    Apr 26 at 1:51






  • 2





    Related: What are my legal rights if somebody writes a book about me without my consent?

    – Philipp
    Apr 26 at 8:59






  • 6





    The answers below cover the legal issues, but I'd like to point out a possible pragmatic solution if the book is fairly popular, and, as you say, uses your father's actual name and identifying informaton (let's say it's Bob Bobson). Practically, it might be far easier (and still highly lucrative) to collaborate with a writer and release your version of the story, marketed as "the true story of Bob Bobson!" The author's audience might be eager to read more about their favorite "character." You won't be able to get money directly from the author, but you will be able to use their success.

    – Obie 2.0
    Apr 26 at 9:00










8




8





might be a better question for Law.SE, still I think it might be on-topic here too

– DJ Spicy Deluxe
Apr 25 at 3:20





might be a better question for Law.SE, still I think it might be on-topic here too

– DJ Spicy Deluxe
Apr 25 at 3:20




2




2





I would say... The question might be legal in nature.. but the answer is one that is of general interest to this forum.

– ashleylee
Apr 25 at 22:16





I would say... The question might be legal in nature.. but the answer is one that is of general interest to this forum.

– ashleylee
Apr 25 at 22:16




4




4





Related from the author's perspective: Do I need permission from people I am writing about if I am writing about a true story that was reported in the media?

– Andrew T.
Apr 26 at 1:51





Related from the author's perspective: Do I need permission from people I am writing about if I am writing about a true story that was reported in the media?

– Andrew T.
Apr 26 at 1:51




2




2





Related: What are my legal rights if somebody writes a book about me without my consent?

– Philipp
Apr 26 at 8:59





Related: What are my legal rights if somebody writes a book about me without my consent?

– Philipp
Apr 26 at 8:59




6




6





The answers below cover the legal issues, but I'd like to point out a possible pragmatic solution if the book is fairly popular, and, as you say, uses your father's actual name and identifying informaton (let's say it's Bob Bobson). Practically, it might be far easier (and still highly lucrative) to collaborate with a writer and release your version of the story, marketed as "the true story of Bob Bobson!" The author's audience might be eager to read more about their favorite "character." You won't be able to get money directly from the author, but you will be able to use their success.

– Obie 2.0
Apr 26 at 9:00







The answers below cover the legal issues, but I'd like to point out a possible pragmatic solution if the book is fairly popular, and, as you say, uses your father's actual name and identifying informaton (let's say it's Bob Bobson). Practically, it might be far easier (and still highly lucrative) to collaborate with a writer and release your version of the story, marketed as "the true story of Bob Bobson!" The author's audience might be eager to read more about their favorite "character." You won't be able to get money directly from the author, but you will be able to use their success.

– Obie 2.0
Apr 26 at 9:00












6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















47














No one can copyright an event



The events that happened to your father don't belong to anyone. They just are. Different people will have different knowledge (or beliefs) about various portions of the events, but they are just different versions of something that happened.



Yes, the author who published the story can copyright the book. But she is copyrighting her rendition of the story, not the events. Your father has the right to tell the same story in his own words. As do you. As does anyone.



Any legal issues are not about copyright



Copyright is not important here. Nor is it really a problem that this author took a real life story and turned it into a book. But using your father's name without his permission is a concern. Since it's a children's book (and you didn't mention this as an issue), I presume that she did not say anything negative about him or violate his privacy or anything like that.



At the very least, it's obnoxious to write a story about someone without his knowledge. Let alone his permission. Or that of his estate, if he is no longer living. Is it illegal? Probably not. After all, newspapers don't need permission to write about someone, why should children's books authors?



Ethically, she should have spoken to your family before moving ahead. And the publisher should have contacted you as well. It's strange that they didn't (unless she self-published). But, again, probably not illegal, as long as she didn't say anything untrue.



Ask a lawyer



To find out your rights, you need to contact a lawyer who works in your jurisdiction. This means in the country this happened in, or in the US state if it happened in the US. Even if I were a lawyer myself (I'm not) who knows publishing law backwards and forward, the law where I live could be completely different from the law where you live. So get a local expert. In the US, it should cost no more than a couple hundred dollars for a serious consultation (a quick consultation may even be free).






share|improve this answer



















  • 8





    In most jurisdictions, one doesn't "copyright" stuff: the stuff is (automatically) protected by copyright by virtue of it being an original work of authorship. Some jurisdictions enable one to register those automatically-created copyrights, but (like placing copyright notices on the work) this is usually an entirely optional step that merely makes enforcement of those rights easier.

    – eggyal
    Apr 26 at 8:19






  • 5





    Since it's a children's book I presume that she did not say anything negative about him — how does this follow? Surely children's books can have bad things and villains in them?

    – gerrit
    Apr 26 at 12:17








  • 1





    @JPhi1618 You can't sell your story. What you can charge for is exclusive access to the subject of the story. Or not so exclusive, depending on the terms of the contract. What you put in quotes is an expression, not a legal reality. If I "sell my story" it means I'm getting paid to sit down with the author and tell them stuff, answer their questions, etc. Same for people caught up in newsworthy tales who sit down for an interview. The story can be background for the author or it can be live TV (radio, etc).

    – Cyn
    Apr 26 at 15:07






  • 2





    @Cyn, Thanks for the explanation. I think that may be a point of confusion for a lot of people because the concept of "selling a story" for a movie or book is so prevalent. It makes it seem like just the story somehow has rights of its own. But I guess that's where "The unauthorized story of Mr Famous!" comes from.

    – JPhi1618
    Apr 26 at 15:10






  • 3





    IANAL, but I think there are differences between ordinary people and "public figures". For instance, in some states actors have a right to publicity, and models have exclusive rights to images of themselves.

    – Barmar
    Apr 26 at 15:20



















17














"Can someone take a story that happened to you, without your knowledge, and publish it?" Of course. Newspapers does this all the time. No one asks the president's permission before writing a news story about the latest bill he presented to Congress. Or on a more personal level, if Joe Blow is arrested, the newspapers don't ask his permission before writing a story about it.



Historians do this all the time. If a scholar is writing the history of, say, World War 2, he doesn't need to get permission from every soldier who was involved in the Normandy invasion before he's allowed to write about the Normandy invasion. Etc.



If someone writes things about you that aren't true and that make you look bad, you can sue them for libel. But in the U.S., truth is an absolute defense against libel. If what they wrote about you is true, they have every legal right to publish it.



It's possible that there are details of the case, or something in your local law, that would give you some legal right to prevent them from publishing. You could check with a lawyer. But frankly, I doubt you would have a case.



As Cyn says, nobody owns facts. Copyright law means that you own your expression of the facts, the words that you wrote or said or sang or whatever to describe the facts. But you don't own the facts.






share|improve this answer































    14














    I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.



    You do have (limited) legal rights to your own name and story. In this case, if the author used your father's actual full legal name, and other identifiable details, and if your father is NOT a public figure, you might be able to make a case against her.



    With that said, it may be in no way worth it, unless this book is a hit bestseller, or unless it has libelous statements damaging to your father's reputation.



    https://stories.avvo.com/money/rights-life-story.html
    https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/who-owns-the-rights-to-your-life-story
    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/life-story-rights-whats-whats-103334



    Note the following recent case, with some similarities, where a bestselling book and movie were involved. The lawsuit was dismissed on a technicality, so it's hard to know what would have happened if it had actually gone to court.



    https://www.oregonlive.com/books/2011/08/handwritten_note_from_author_f.html






    share|improve this answer





















    • 5





      "unless it has libelous (sic.) statements damaging your father's reputation"—there's nothing in the question to suggest that the published facts are untrue, and truthful statements can never be libellous. Furthermore, one cannot libel the dead—so if the OP's father is deceased, there wouldn't be any recourse here.

      – eggyal
      Apr 26 at 8:25



















    10














    If this happened in European Union




    using his name and other specifics




    without his permission may violate General Data Protection Regulation. Note, if your father died more than 10 years ago, it no longer applies.



    Consult a lawyer if your father is alive or died less than 10 years ago.



    As eggyal says:




    Whereas newspapers and/or authors of academic works may be able to claim public interest as a basis for lawful processing, I doubt a children's book would meet that test. Furthermore, GDPR would apply if the controller (author) or any processor (includes not only the publisher but perhaps even retailers) of the data has some presence in the EU (or other place to which a Member State's law applies) that is connected to their activity with the book, regardless of where the actual data "processing" takes place.




    But details will have to be dealt with by the qualified law professional anyway.






    share|improve this answer





















    • 2





      Excellent point. Whereas newspapers and/or authors of academic works may be able to claim public interest as a basis for lawful processing, I doubt a children's book would meet that test. Furthermore, GDPR would apply if the controller (author) or any processor (includes not only the publisher but perhaps even retailers) of the data has some presence in the EU (or other place to which a Member State's law applies) that is connected to their activity with the book, regardless of where the actual data "processing" takes place.

      – eggyal
      Apr 26 at 8:45






    • 2





      Note also that Article 85 provides for Member States to exempt/derogate certain parts of GDPR if they are necessary to reconcile the right to the protection of personal data with the freedom of expression and information (including in literary works).

      – eggyal
      Apr 26 at 8:56






    • 2





      @eggyal also, newspapers mostly use only the personal data person made publicly available by himself. When writing about people that are not public figures, they often use name only, and even then disclaimer like "some names have been changed" aren't uncommon. Freedom of expression and information are interesting points, but only qualified lawyer who will see this case can tell anything solid.

      – Mołot
      Apr 26 at 8:56








    • 2





      @eggyal I meant personal data. Even investigative reporters usually do not give home address of public figure, even if it is an address of, say, surprisingly expensive villa that was a gift from mafia ;) They say there is such villa etc, but not address.

      – Mołot
      Apr 26 at 9:55








    • 2





      @Molot: Ah, understood. But "personal data" under GDPR is defined as "any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person"—it's a lot wider in scope than just home addresses etc, and certainly covers the sorts of facts disclosed by investigative reporters.

      – eggyal
      Apr 26 at 9:58



















    7














    Assuming you are in the US...



    Copyright will likely protect this author's expression of the facts. This means that you cannot copy phrases from the book (for example), but you can write a different book about the same event. (This is true no matter whose father the book is about, actually.) Copyright.gov says:




    Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed.




    In other words, it doesn't seem to me like you have a case for a copyright angle were you to sue.



    There may be other angles for you to pursue, but only a lawyer can tell you what those would be. There's just too little information to go on.






    share|improve this answer



















    • 2





      At this level, copyright is basically the same everywhere: copyright is about expression, not about the thing being expressed. There's no copyright case, here.

      – David Richerby
      Apr 26 at 11:43



















    4
















    Names, characters, businesses, places, events, locales, and incidents are either the products of the author's imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental.





    This common disclaimer exists for a reason.



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_persons_fictitious_disclaimer



    This is why I am not convinced that what the person did is legal... (especially if your dad isn't a public figure)



    If you have any concern, you should consult a lawyer. But I think you have a legitimate case.






    share|improve this answer
























    • +1 for bringing up the naming issue

      – Bernat
      Apr 26 at 7:49






    • 5





      The disclaimer is placed to reduce the risk of someone claiming that the book says something that is untrue about them and that causes harm to their reputation (libel). It is certainly not a legal requirement for works to be imagined or fictitious.

      – eggyal
      Apr 26 at 8:09












    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "166"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fwriting.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f44777%2fcan-someone-publish-a-story-that-happened-to-you%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    6 Answers
    6






    active

    oldest

    votes








    6 Answers
    6






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    47














    No one can copyright an event



    The events that happened to your father don't belong to anyone. They just are. Different people will have different knowledge (or beliefs) about various portions of the events, but they are just different versions of something that happened.



    Yes, the author who published the story can copyright the book. But she is copyrighting her rendition of the story, not the events. Your father has the right to tell the same story in his own words. As do you. As does anyone.



    Any legal issues are not about copyright



    Copyright is not important here. Nor is it really a problem that this author took a real life story and turned it into a book. But using your father's name without his permission is a concern. Since it's a children's book (and you didn't mention this as an issue), I presume that she did not say anything negative about him or violate his privacy or anything like that.



    At the very least, it's obnoxious to write a story about someone without his knowledge. Let alone his permission. Or that of his estate, if he is no longer living. Is it illegal? Probably not. After all, newspapers don't need permission to write about someone, why should children's books authors?



    Ethically, she should have spoken to your family before moving ahead. And the publisher should have contacted you as well. It's strange that they didn't (unless she self-published). But, again, probably not illegal, as long as she didn't say anything untrue.



    Ask a lawyer



    To find out your rights, you need to contact a lawyer who works in your jurisdiction. This means in the country this happened in, or in the US state if it happened in the US. Even if I were a lawyer myself (I'm not) who knows publishing law backwards and forward, the law where I live could be completely different from the law where you live. So get a local expert. In the US, it should cost no more than a couple hundred dollars for a serious consultation (a quick consultation may even be free).






    share|improve this answer



















    • 8





      In most jurisdictions, one doesn't "copyright" stuff: the stuff is (automatically) protected by copyright by virtue of it being an original work of authorship. Some jurisdictions enable one to register those automatically-created copyrights, but (like placing copyright notices on the work) this is usually an entirely optional step that merely makes enforcement of those rights easier.

      – eggyal
      Apr 26 at 8:19






    • 5





      Since it's a children's book I presume that she did not say anything negative about him — how does this follow? Surely children's books can have bad things and villains in them?

      – gerrit
      Apr 26 at 12:17








    • 1





      @JPhi1618 You can't sell your story. What you can charge for is exclusive access to the subject of the story. Or not so exclusive, depending on the terms of the contract. What you put in quotes is an expression, not a legal reality. If I "sell my story" it means I'm getting paid to sit down with the author and tell them stuff, answer their questions, etc. Same for people caught up in newsworthy tales who sit down for an interview. The story can be background for the author or it can be live TV (radio, etc).

      – Cyn
      Apr 26 at 15:07






    • 2





      @Cyn, Thanks for the explanation. I think that may be a point of confusion for a lot of people because the concept of "selling a story" for a movie or book is so prevalent. It makes it seem like just the story somehow has rights of its own. But I guess that's where "The unauthorized story of Mr Famous!" comes from.

      – JPhi1618
      Apr 26 at 15:10






    • 3





      IANAL, but I think there are differences between ordinary people and "public figures". For instance, in some states actors have a right to publicity, and models have exclusive rights to images of themselves.

      – Barmar
      Apr 26 at 15:20
















    47














    No one can copyright an event



    The events that happened to your father don't belong to anyone. They just are. Different people will have different knowledge (or beliefs) about various portions of the events, but they are just different versions of something that happened.



    Yes, the author who published the story can copyright the book. But she is copyrighting her rendition of the story, not the events. Your father has the right to tell the same story in his own words. As do you. As does anyone.



    Any legal issues are not about copyright



    Copyright is not important here. Nor is it really a problem that this author took a real life story and turned it into a book. But using your father's name without his permission is a concern. Since it's a children's book (and you didn't mention this as an issue), I presume that she did not say anything negative about him or violate his privacy or anything like that.



    At the very least, it's obnoxious to write a story about someone without his knowledge. Let alone his permission. Or that of his estate, if he is no longer living. Is it illegal? Probably not. After all, newspapers don't need permission to write about someone, why should children's books authors?



    Ethically, she should have spoken to your family before moving ahead. And the publisher should have contacted you as well. It's strange that they didn't (unless she self-published). But, again, probably not illegal, as long as she didn't say anything untrue.



    Ask a lawyer



    To find out your rights, you need to contact a lawyer who works in your jurisdiction. This means in the country this happened in, or in the US state if it happened in the US. Even if I were a lawyer myself (I'm not) who knows publishing law backwards and forward, the law where I live could be completely different from the law where you live. So get a local expert. In the US, it should cost no more than a couple hundred dollars for a serious consultation (a quick consultation may even be free).






    share|improve this answer



















    • 8





      In most jurisdictions, one doesn't "copyright" stuff: the stuff is (automatically) protected by copyright by virtue of it being an original work of authorship. Some jurisdictions enable one to register those automatically-created copyrights, but (like placing copyright notices on the work) this is usually an entirely optional step that merely makes enforcement of those rights easier.

      – eggyal
      Apr 26 at 8:19






    • 5





      Since it's a children's book I presume that she did not say anything negative about him — how does this follow? Surely children's books can have bad things and villains in them?

      – gerrit
      Apr 26 at 12:17








    • 1





      @JPhi1618 You can't sell your story. What you can charge for is exclusive access to the subject of the story. Or not so exclusive, depending on the terms of the contract. What you put in quotes is an expression, not a legal reality. If I "sell my story" it means I'm getting paid to sit down with the author and tell them stuff, answer their questions, etc. Same for people caught up in newsworthy tales who sit down for an interview. The story can be background for the author or it can be live TV (radio, etc).

      – Cyn
      Apr 26 at 15:07






    • 2





      @Cyn, Thanks for the explanation. I think that may be a point of confusion for a lot of people because the concept of "selling a story" for a movie or book is so prevalent. It makes it seem like just the story somehow has rights of its own. But I guess that's where "The unauthorized story of Mr Famous!" comes from.

      – JPhi1618
      Apr 26 at 15:10






    • 3





      IANAL, but I think there are differences between ordinary people and "public figures". For instance, in some states actors have a right to publicity, and models have exclusive rights to images of themselves.

      – Barmar
      Apr 26 at 15:20














    47












    47








    47







    No one can copyright an event



    The events that happened to your father don't belong to anyone. They just are. Different people will have different knowledge (or beliefs) about various portions of the events, but they are just different versions of something that happened.



    Yes, the author who published the story can copyright the book. But she is copyrighting her rendition of the story, not the events. Your father has the right to tell the same story in his own words. As do you. As does anyone.



    Any legal issues are not about copyright



    Copyright is not important here. Nor is it really a problem that this author took a real life story and turned it into a book. But using your father's name without his permission is a concern. Since it's a children's book (and you didn't mention this as an issue), I presume that she did not say anything negative about him or violate his privacy or anything like that.



    At the very least, it's obnoxious to write a story about someone without his knowledge. Let alone his permission. Or that of his estate, if he is no longer living. Is it illegal? Probably not. After all, newspapers don't need permission to write about someone, why should children's books authors?



    Ethically, she should have spoken to your family before moving ahead. And the publisher should have contacted you as well. It's strange that they didn't (unless she self-published). But, again, probably not illegal, as long as she didn't say anything untrue.



    Ask a lawyer



    To find out your rights, you need to contact a lawyer who works in your jurisdiction. This means in the country this happened in, or in the US state if it happened in the US. Even if I were a lawyer myself (I'm not) who knows publishing law backwards and forward, the law where I live could be completely different from the law where you live. So get a local expert. In the US, it should cost no more than a couple hundred dollars for a serious consultation (a quick consultation may even be free).






    share|improve this answer













    No one can copyright an event



    The events that happened to your father don't belong to anyone. They just are. Different people will have different knowledge (or beliefs) about various portions of the events, but they are just different versions of something that happened.



    Yes, the author who published the story can copyright the book. But she is copyrighting her rendition of the story, not the events. Your father has the right to tell the same story in his own words. As do you. As does anyone.



    Any legal issues are not about copyright



    Copyright is not important here. Nor is it really a problem that this author took a real life story and turned it into a book. But using your father's name without his permission is a concern. Since it's a children's book (and you didn't mention this as an issue), I presume that she did not say anything negative about him or violate his privacy or anything like that.



    At the very least, it's obnoxious to write a story about someone without his knowledge. Let alone his permission. Or that of his estate, if he is no longer living. Is it illegal? Probably not. After all, newspapers don't need permission to write about someone, why should children's books authors?



    Ethically, she should have spoken to your family before moving ahead. And the publisher should have contacted you as well. It's strange that they didn't (unless she self-published). But, again, probably not illegal, as long as she didn't say anything untrue.



    Ask a lawyer



    To find out your rights, you need to contact a lawyer who works in your jurisdiction. This means in the country this happened in, or in the US state if it happened in the US. Even if I were a lawyer myself (I'm not) who knows publishing law backwards and forward, the law where I live could be completely different from the law where you live. So get a local expert. In the US, it should cost no more than a couple hundred dollars for a serious consultation (a quick consultation may even be free).







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered Apr 25 at 4:37









    CynCyn

    22.9k150107




    22.9k150107








    • 8





      In most jurisdictions, one doesn't "copyright" stuff: the stuff is (automatically) protected by copyright by virtue of it being an original work of authorship. Some jurisdictions enable one to register those automatically-created copyrights, but (like placing copyright notices on the work) this is usually an entirely optional step that merely makes enforcement of those rights easier.

      – eggyal
      Apr 26 at 8:19






    • 5





      Since it's a children's book I presume that she did not say anything negative about him — how does this follow? Surely children's books can have bad things and villains in them?

      – gerrit
      Apr 26 at 12:17








    • 1





      @JPhi1618 You can't sell your story. What you can charge for is exclusive access to the subject of the story. Or not so exclusive, depending on the terms of the contract. What you put in quotes is an expression, not a legal reality. If I "sell my story" it means I'm getting paid to sit down with the author and tell them stuff, answer their questions, etc. Same for people caught up in newsworthy tales who sit down for an interview. The story can be background for the author or it can be live TV (radio, etc).

      – Cyn
      Apr 26 at 15:07






    • 2





      @Cyn, Thanks for the explanation. I think that may be a point of confusion for a lot of people because the concept of "selling a story" for a movie or book is so prevalent. It makes it seem like just the story somehow has rights of its own. But I guess that's where "The unauthorized story of Mr Famous!" comes from.

      – JPhi1618
      Apr 26 at 15:10






    • 3





      IANAL, but I think there are differences between ordinary people and "public figures". For instance, in some states actors have a right to publicity, and models have exclusive rights to images of themselves.

      – Barmar
      Apr 26 at 15:20














    • 8





      In most jurisdictions, one doesn't "copyright" stuff: the stuff is (automatically) protected by copyright by virtue of it being an original work of authorship. Some jurisdictions enable one to register those automatically-created copyrights, but (like placing copyright notices on the work) this is usually an entirely optional step that merely makes enforcement of those rights easier.

      – eggyal
      Apr 26 at 8:19






    • 5





      Since it's a children's book I presume that she did not say anything negative about him — how does this follow? Surely children's books can have bad things and villains in them?

      – gerrit
      Apr 26 at 12:17








    • 1





      @JPhi1618 You can't sell your story. What you can charge for is exclusive access to the subject of the story. Or not so exclusive, depending on the terms of the contract. What you put in quotes is an expression, not a legal reality. If I "sell my story" it means I'm getting paid to sit down with the author and tell them stuff, answer their questions, etc. Same for people caught up in newsworthy tales who sit down for an interview. The story can be background for the author or it can be live TV (radio, etc).

      – Cyn
      Apr 26 at 15:07






    • 2





      @Cyn, Thanks for the explanation. I think that may be a point of confusion for a lot of people because the concept of "selling a story" for a movie or book is so prevalent. It makes it seem like just the story somehow has rights of its own. But I guess that's where "The unauthorized story of Mr Famous!" comes from.

      – JPhi1618
      Apr 26 at 15:10






    • 3





      IANAL, but I think there are differences between ordinary people and "public figures". For instance, in some states actors have a right to publicity, and models have exclusive rights to images of themselves.

      – Barmar
      Apr 26 at 15:20








    8




    8





    In most jurisdictions, one doesn't "copyright" stuff: the stuff is (automatically) protected by copyright by virtue of it being an original work of authorship. Some jurisdictions enable one to register those automatically-created copyrights, but (like placing copyright notices on the work) this is usually an entirely optional step that merely makes enforcement of those rights easier.

    – eggyal
    Apr 26 at 8:19





    In most jurisdictions, one doesn't "copyright" stuff: the stuff is (automatically) protected by copyright by virtue of it being an original work of authorship. Some jurisdictions enable one to register those automatically-created copyrights, but (like placing copyright notices on the work) this is usually an entirely optional step that merely makes enforcement of those rights easier.

    – eggyal
    Apr 26 at 8:19




    5




    5





    Since it's a children's book I presume that she did not say anything negative about him — how does this follow? Surely children's books can have bad things and villains in them?

    – gerrit
    Apr 26 at 12:17







    Since it's a children's book I presume that she did not say anything negative about him — how does this follow? Surely children's books can have bad things and villains in them?

    – gerrit
    Apr 26 at 12:17






    1




    1





    @JPhi1618 You can't sell your story. What you can charge for is exclusive access to the subject of the story. Or not so exclusive, depending on the terms of the contract. What you put in quotes is an expression, not a legal reality. If I "sell my story" it means I'm getting paid to sit down with the author and tell them stuff, answer their questions, etc. Same for people caught up in newsworthy tales who sit down for an interview. The story can be background for the author or it can be live TV (radio, etc).

    – Cyn
    Apr 26 at 15:07





    @JPhi1618 You can't sell your story. What you can charge for is exclusive access to the subject of the story. Or not so exclusive, depending on the terms of the contract. What you put in quotes is an expression, not a legal reality. If I "sell my story" it means I'm getting paid to sit down with the author and tell them stuff, answer their questions, etc. Same for people caught up in newsworthy tales who sit down for an interview. The story can be background for the author or it can be live TV (radio, etc).

    – Cyn
    Apr 26 at 15:07




    2




    2





    @Cyn, Thanks for the explanation. I think that may be a point of confusion for a lot of people because the concept of "selling a story" for a movie or book is so prevalent. It makes it seem like just the story somehow has rights of its own. But I guess that's where "The unauthorized story of Mr Famous!" comes from.

    – JPhi1618
    Apr 26 at 15:10





    @Cyn, Thanks for the explanation. I think that may be a point of confusion for a lot of people because the concept of "selling a story" for a movie or book is so prevalent. It makes it seem like just the story somehow has rights of its own. But I guess that's where "The unauthorized story of Mr Famous!" comes from.

    – JPhi1618
    Apr 26 at 15:10




    3




    3





    IANAL, but I think there are differences between ordinary people and "public figures". For instance, in some states actors have a right to publicity, and models have exclusive rights to images of themselves.

    – Barmar
    Apr 26 at 15:20





    IANAL, but I think there are differences between ordinary people and "public figures". For instance, in some states actors have a right to publicity, and models have exclusive rights to images of themselves.

    – Barmar
    Apr 26 at 15:20











    17














    "Can someone take a story that happened to you, without your knowledge, and publish it?" Of course. Newspapers does this all the time. No one asks the president's permission before writing a news story about the latest bill he presented to Congress. Or on a more personal level, if Joe Blow is arrested, the newspapers don't ask his permission before writing a story about it.



    Historians do this all the time. If a scholar is writing the history of, say, World War 2, he doesn't need to get permission from every soldier who was involved in the Normandy invasion before he's allowed to write about the Normandy invasion. Etc.



    If someone writes things about you that aren't true and that make you look bad, you can sue them for libel. But in the U.S., truth is an absolute defense against libel. If what they wrote about you is true, they have every legal right to publish it.



    It's possible that there are details of the case, or something in your local law, that would give you some legal right to prevent them from publishing. You could check with a lawyer. But frankly, I doubt you would have a case.



    As Cyn says, nobody owns facts. Copyright law means that you own your expression of the facts, the words that you wrote or said or sang or whatever to describe the facts. But you don't own the facts.






    share|improve this answer




























      17














      "Can someone take a story that happened to you, without your knowledge, and publish it?" Of course. Newspapers does this all the time. No one asks the president's permission before writing a news story about the latest bill he presented to Congress. Or on a more personal level, if Joe Blow is arrested, the newspapers don't ask his permission before writing a story about it.



      Historians do this all the time. If a scholar is writing the history of, say, World War 2, he doesn't need to get permission from every soldier who was involved in the Normandy invasion before he's allowed to write about the Normandy invasion. Etc.



      If someone writes things about you that aren't true and that make you look bad, you can sue them for libel. But in the U.S., truth is an absolute defense against libel. If what they wrote about you is true, they have every legal right to publish it.



      It's possible that there are details of the case, or something in your local law, that would give you some legal right to prevent them from publishing. You could check with a lawyer. But frankly, I doubt you would have a case.



      As Cyn says, nobody owns facts. Copyright law means that you own your expression of the facts, the words that you wrote or said or sang or whatever to describe the facts. But you don't own the facts.






      share|improve this answer


























        17












        17








        17







        "Can someone take a story that happened to you, without your knowledge, and publish it?" Of course. Newspapers does this all the time. No one asks the president's permission before writing a news story about the latest bill he presented to Congress. Or on a more personal level, if Joe Blow is arrested, the newspapers don't ask his permission before writing a story about it.



        Historians do this all the time. If a scholar is writing the history of, say, World War 2, he doesn't need to get permission from every soldier who was involved in the Normandy invasion before he's allowed to write about the Normandy invasion. Etc.



        If someone writes things about you that aren't true and that make you look bad, you can sue them for libel. But in the U.S., truth is an absolute defense against libel. If what they wrote about you is true, they have every legal right to publish it.



        It's possible that there are details of the case, or something in your local law, that would give you some legal right to prevent them from publishing. You could check with a lawyer. But frankly, I doubt you would have a case.



        As Cyn says, nobody owns facts. Copyright law means that you own your expression of the facts, the words that you wrote or said or sang or whatever to describe the facts. But you don't own the facts.






        share|improve this answer













        "Can someone take a story that happened to you, without your knowledge, and publish it?" Of course. Newspapers does this all the time. No one asks the president's permission before writing a news story about the latest bill he presented to Congress. Or on a more personal level, if Joe Blow is arrested, the newspapers don't ask his permission before writing a story about it.



        Historians do this all the time. If a scholar is writing the history of, say, World War 2, he doesn't need to get permission from every soldier who was involved in the Normandy invasion before he's allowed to write about the Normandy invasion. Etc.



        If someone writes things about you that aren't true and that make you look bad, you can sue them for libel. But in the U.S., truth is an absolute defense against libel. If what they wrote about you is true, they have every legal right to publish it.



        It's possible that there are details of the case, or something in your local law, that would give you some legal right to prevent them from publishing. You could check with a lawyer. But frankly, I doubt you would have a case.



        As Cyn says, nobody owns facts. Copyright law means that you own your expression of the facts, the words that you wrote or said or sang or whatever to describe the facts. But you don't own the facts.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Apr 25 at 18:05









        JayJay

        21k1657




        21k1657























            14














            I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.



            You do have (limited) legal rights to your own name and story. In this case, if the author used your father's actual full legal name, and other identifiable details, and if your father is NOT a public figure, you might be able to make a case against her.



            With that said, it may be in no way worth it, unless this book is a hit bestseller, or unless it has libelous statements damaging to your father's reputation.



            https://stories.avvo.com/money/rights-life-story.html
            https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/who-owns-the-rights-to-your-life-story
            https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/life-story-rights-whats-whats-103334



            Note the following recent case, with some similarities, where a bestselling book and movie were involved. The lawsuit was dismissed on a technicality, so it's hard to know what would have happened if it had actually gone to court.



            https://www.oregonlive.com/books/2011/08/handwritten_note_from_author_f.html






            share|improve this answer





















            • 5





              "unless it has libelous (sic.) statements damaging your father's reputation"—there's nothing in the question to suggest that the published facts are untrue, and truthful statements can never be libellous. Furthermore, one cannot libel the dead—so if the OP's father is deceased, there wouldn't be any recourse here.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:25
















            14














            I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.



            You do have (limited) legal rights to your own name and story. In this case, if the author used your father's actual full legal name, and other identifiable details, and if your father is NOT a public figure, you might be able to make a case against her.



            With that said, it may be in no way worth it, unless this book is a hit bestseller, or unless it has libelous statements damaging to your father's reputation.



            https://stories.avvo.com/money/rights-life-story.html
            https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/who-owns-the-rights-to-your-life-story
            https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/life-story-rights-whats-whats-103334



            Note the following recent case, with some similarities, where a bestselling book and movie were involved. The lawsuit was dismissed on a technicality, so it's hard to know what would have happened if it had actually gone to court.



            https://www.oregonlive.com/books/2011/08/handwritten_note_from_author_f.html






            share|improve this answer





















            • 5





              "unless it has libelous (sic.) statements damaging your father's reputation"—there's nothing in the question to suggest that the published facts are untrue, and truthful statements can never be libellous. Furthermore, one cannot libel the dead—so if the OP's father is deceased, there wouldn't be any recourse here.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:25














            14












            14








            14







            I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.



            You do have (limited) legal rights to your own name and story. In this case, if the author used your father's actual full legal name, and other identifiable details, and if your father is NOT a public figure, you might be able to make a case against her.



            With that said, it may be in no way worth it, unless this book is a hit bestseller, or unless it has libelous statements damaging to your father's reputation.



            https://stories.avvo.com/money/rights-life-story.html
            https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/who-owns-the-rights-to-your-life-story
            https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/life-story-rights-whats-whats-103334



            Note the following recent case, with some similarities, where a bestselling book and movie were involved. The lawsuit was dismissed on a technicality, so it's hard to know what would have happened if it had actually gone to court.



            https://www.oregonlive.com/books/2011/08/handwritten_note_from_author_f.html






            share|improve this answer















            I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.



            You do have (limited) legal rights to your own name and story. In this case, if the author used your father's actual full legal name, and other identifiable details, and if your father is NOT a public figure, you might be able to make a case against her.



            With that said, it may be in no way worth it, unless this book is a hit bestseller, or unless it has libelous statements damaging to your father's reputation.



            https://stories.avvo.com/money/rights-life-story.html
            https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/who-owns-the-rights-to-your-life-story
            https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/life-story-rights-whats-whats-103334



            Note the following recent case, with some similarities, where a bestselling book and movie were involved. The lawsuit was dismissed on a technicality, so it's hard to know what would have happened if it had actually gone to court.



            https://www.oregonlive.com/books/2011/08/handwritten_note_from_author_f.html







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Apr 25 at 18:50

























            answered Apr 25 at 14:26









            Chris SunamiChris Sunami

            35.4k344130




            35.4k344130








            • 5





              "unless it has libelous (sic.) statements damaging your father's reputation"—there's nothing in the question to suggest that the published facts are untrue, and truthful statements can never be libellous. Furthermore, one cannot libel the dead—so if the OP's father is deceased, there wouldn't be any recourse here.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:25














            • 5





              "unless it has libelous (sic.) statements damaging your father's reputation"—there's nothing in the question to suggest that the published facts are untrue, and truthful statements can never be libellous. Furthermore, one cannot libel the dead—so if the OP's father is deceased, there wouldn't be any recourse here.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:25








            5




            5





            "unless it has libelous (sic.) statements damaging your father's reputation"—there's nothing in the question to suggest that the published facts are untrue, and truthful statements can never be libellous. Furthermore, one cannot libel the dead—so if the OP's father is deceased, there wouldn't be any recourse here.

            – eggyal
            Apr 26 at 8:25





            "unless it has libelous (sic.) statements damaging your father's reputation"—there's nothing in the question to suggest that the published facts are untrue, and truthful statements can never be libellous. Furthermore, one cannot libel the dead—so if the OP's father is deceased, there wouldn't be any recourse here.

            – eggyal
            Apr 26 at 8:25











            10














            If this happened in European Union




            using his name and other specifics




            without his permission may violate General Data Protection Regulation. Note, if your father died more than 10 years ago, it no longer applies.



            Consult a lawyer if your father is alive or died less than 10 years ago.



            As eggyal says:




            Whereas newspapers and/or authors of academic works may be able to claim public interest as a basis for lawful processing, I doubt a children's book would meet that test. Furthermore, GDPR would apply if the controller (author) or any processor (includes not only the publisher but perhaps even retailers) of the data has some presence in the EU (or other place to which a Member State's law applies) that is connected to their activity with the book, regardless of where the actual data "processing" takes place.




            But details will have to be dealt with by the qualified law professional anyway.






            share|improve this answer





















            • 2





              Excellent point. Whereas newspapers and/or authors of academic works may be able to claim public interest as a basis for lawful processing, I doubt a children's book would meet that test. Furthermore, GDPR would apply if the controller (author) or any processor (includes not only the publisher but perhaps even retailers) of the data has some presence in the EU (or other place to which a Member State's law applies) that is connected to their activity with the book, regardless of where the actual data "processing" takes place.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:45






            • 2





              Note also that Article 85 provides for Member States to exempt/derogate certain parts of GDPR if they are necessary to reconcile the right to the protection of personal data with the freedom of expression and information (including in literary works).

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:56






            • 2





              @eggyal also, newspapers mostly use only the personal data person made publicly available by himself. When writing about people that are not public figures, they often use name only, and even then disclaimer like "some names have been changed" aren't uncommon. Freedom of expression and information are interesting points, but only qualified lawyer who will see this case can tell anything solid.

              – Mołot
              Apr 26 at 8:56








            • 2





              @eggyal I meant personal data. Even investigative reporters usually do not give home address of public figure, even if it is an address of, say, surprisingly expensive villa that was a gift from mafia ;) They say there is such villa etc, but not address.

              – Mołot
              Apr 26 at 9:55








            • 2





              @Molot: Ah, understood. But "personal data" under GDPR is defined as "any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person"—it's a lot wider in scope than just home addresses etc, and certainly covers the sorts of facts disclosed by investigative reporters.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 9:58
















            10














            If this happened in European Union




            using his name and other specifics




            without his permission may violate General Data Protection Regulation. Note, if your father died more than 10 years ago, it no longer applies.



            Consult a lawyer if your father is alive or died less than 10 years ago.



            As eggyal says:




            Whereas newspapers and/or authors of academic works may be able to claim public interest as a basis for lawful processing, I doubt a children's book would meet that test. Furthermore, GDPR would apply if the controller (author) or any processor (includes not only the publisher but perhaps even retailers) of the data has some presence in the EU (or other place to which a Member State's law applies) that is connected to their activity with the book, regardless of where the actual data "processing" takes place.




            But details will have to be dealt with by the qualified law professional anyway.






            share|improve this answer





















            • 2





              Excellent point. Whereas newspapers and/or authors of academic works may be able to claim public interest as a basis for lawful processing, I doubt a children's book would meet that test. Furthermore, GDPR would apply if the controller (author) or any processor (includes not only the publisher but perhaps even retailers) of the data has some presence in the EU (or other place to which a Member State's law applies) that is connected to their activity with the book, regardless of where the actual data "processing" takes place.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:45






            • 2





              Note also that Article 85 provides for Member States to exempt/derogate certain parts of GDPR if they are necessary to reconcile the right to the protection of personal data with the freedom of expression and information (including in literary works).

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:56






            • 2





              @eggyal also, newspapers mostly use only the personal data person made publicly available by himself. When writing about people that are not public figures, they often use name only, and even then disclaimer like "some names have been changed" aren't uncommon. Freedom of expression and information are interesting points, but only qualified lawyer who will see this case can tell anything solid.

              – Mołot
              Apr 26 at 8:56








            • 2





              @eggyal I meant personal data. Even investigative reporters usually do not give home address of public figure, even if it is an address of, say, surprisingly expensive villa that was a gift from mafia ;) They say there is such villa etc, but not address.

              – Mołot
              Apr 26 at 9:55








            • 2





              @Molot: Ah, understood. But "personal data" under GDPR is defined as "any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person"—it's a lot wider in scope than just home addresses etc, and certainly covers the sorts of facts disclosed by investigative reporters.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 9:58














            10












            10








            10







            If this happened in European Union




            using his name and other specifics




            without his permission may violate General Data Protection Regulation. Note, if your father died more than 10 years ago, it no longer applies.



            Consult a lawyer if your father is alive or died less than 10 years ago.



            As eggyal says:




            Whereas newspapers and/or authors of academic works may be able to claim public interest as a basis for lawful processing, I doubt a children's book would meet that test. Furthermore, GDPR would apply if the controller (author) or any processor (includes not only the publisher but perhaps even retailers) of the data has some presence in the EU (or other place to which a Member State's law applies) that is connected to their activity with the book, regardless of where the actual data "processing" takes place.




            But details will have to be dealt with by the qualified law professional anyway.






            share|improve this answer















            If this happened in European Union




            using his name and other specifics




            without his permission may violate General Data Protection Regulation. Note, if your father died more than 10 years ago, it no longer applies.



            Consult a lawyer if your father is alive or died less than 10 years ago.



            As eggyal says:




            Whereas newspapers and/or authors of academic works may be able to claim public interest as a basis for lawful processing, I doubt a children's book would meet that test. Furthermore, GDPR would apply if the controller (author) or any processor (includes not only the publisher but perhaps even retailers) of the data has some presence in the EU (or other place to which a Member State's law applies) that is connected to their activity with the book, regardless of where the actual data "processing" takes place.




            But details will have to be dealt with by the qualified law professional anyway.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited Apr 26 at 8:53

























            answered Apr 26 at 8:17









            MołotMołot

            20116




            20116








            • 2





              Excellent point. Whereas newspapers and/or authors of academic works may be able to claim public interest as a basis for lawful processing, I doubt a children's book would meet that test. Furthermore, GDPR would apply if the controller (author) or any processor (includes not only the publisher but perhaps even retailers) of the data has some presence in the EU (or other place to which a Member State's law applies) that is connected to their activity with the book, regardless of where the actual data "processing" takes place.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:45






            • 2





              Note also that Article 85 provides for Member States to exempt/derogate certain parts of GDPR if they are necessary to reconcile the right to the protection of personal data with the freedom of expression and information (including in literary works).

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:56






            • 2





              @eggyal also, newspapers mostly use only the personal data person made publicly available by himself. When writing about people that are not public figures, they often use name only, and even then disclaimer like "some names have been changed" aren't uncommon. Freedom of expression and information are interesting points, but only qualified lawyer who will see this case can tell anything solid.

              – Mołot
              Apr 26 at 8:56








            • 2





              @eggyal I meant personal data. Even investigative reporters usually do not give home address of public figure, even if it is an address of, say, surprisingly expensive villa that was a gift from mafia ;) They say there is such villa etc, but not address.

              – Mołot
              Apr 26 at 9:55








            • 2





              @Molot: Ah, understood. But "personal data" under GDPR is defined as "any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person"—it's a lot wider in scope than just home addresses etc, and certainly covers the sorts of facts disclosed by investigative reporters.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 9:58














            • 2





              Excellent point. Whereas newspapers and/or authors of academic works may be able to claim public interest as a basis for lawful processing, I doubt a children's book would meet that test. Furthermore, GDPR would apply if the controller (author) or any processor (includes not only the publisher but perhaps even retailers) of the data has some presence in the EU (or other place to which a Member State's law applies) that is connected to their activity with the book, regardless of where the actual data "processing" takes place.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:45






            • 2





              Note also that Article 85 provides for Member States to exempt/derogate certain parts of GDPR if they are necessary to reconcile the right to the protection of personal data with the freedom of expression and information (including in literary works).

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:56






            • 2





              @eggyal also, newspapers mostly use only the personal data person made publicly available by himself. When writing about people that are not public figures, they often use name only, and even then disclaimer like "some names have been changed" aren't uncommon. Freedom of expression and information are interesting points, but only qualified lawyer who will see this case can tell anything solid.

              – Mołot
              Apr 26 at 8:56








            • 2





              @eggyal I meant personal data. Even investigative reporters usually do not give home address of public figure, even if it is an address of, say, surprisingly expensive villa that was a gift from mafia ;) They say there is such villa etc, but not address.

              – Mołot
              Apr 26 at 9:55








            • 2





              @Molot: Ah, understood. But "personal data" under GDPR is defined as "any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person"—it's a lot wider in scope than just home addresses etc, and certainly covers the sorts of facts disclosed by investigative reporters.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 9:58








            2




            2





            Excellent point. Whereas newspapers and/or authors of academic works may be able to claim public interest as a basis for lawful processing, I doubt a children's book would meet that test. Furthermore, GDPR would apply if the controller (author) or any processor (includes not only the publisher but perhaps even retailers) of the data has some presence in the EU (or other place to which a Member State's law applies) that is connected to their activity with the book, regardless of where the actual data "processing" takes place.

            – eggyal
            Apr 26 at 8:45





            Excellent point. Whereas newspapers and/or authors of academic works may be able to claim public interest as a basis for lawful processing, I doubt a children's book would meet that test. Furthermore, GDPR would apply if the controller (author) or any processor (includes not only the publisher but perhaps even retailers) of the data has some presence in the EU (or other place to which a Member State's law applies) that is connected to their activity with the book, regardless of where the actual data "processing" takes place.

            – eggyal
            Apr 26 at 8:45




            2




            2





            Note also that Article 85 provides for Member States to exempt/derogate certain parts of GDPR if they are necessary to reconcile the right to the protection of personal data with the freedom of expression and information (including in literary works).

            – eggyal
            Apr 26 at 8:56





            Note also that Article 85 provides for Member States to exempt/derogate certain parts of GDPR if they are necessary to reconcile the right to the protection of personal data with the freedom of expression and information (including in literary works).

            – eggyal
            Apr 26 at 8:56




            2




            2





            @eggyal also, newspapers mostly use only the personal data person made publicly available by himself. When writing about people that are not public figures, they often use name only, and even then disclaimer like "some names have been changed" aren't uncommon. Freedom of expression and information are interesting points, but only qualified lawyer who will see this case can tell anything solid.

            – Mołot
            Apr 26 at 8:56







            @eggyal also, newspapers mostly use only the personal data person made publicly available by himself. When writing about people that are not public figures, they often use name only, and even then disclaimer like "some names have been changed" aren't uncommon. Freedom of expression and information are interesting points, but only qualified lawyer who will see this case can tell anything solid.

            – Mołot
            Apr 26 at 8:56






            2




            2





            @eggyal I meant personal data. Even investigative reporters usually do not give home address of public figure, even if it is an address of, say, surprisingly expensive villa that was a gift from mafia ;) They say there is such villa etc, but not address.

            – Mołot
            Apr 26 at 9:55







            @eggyal I meant personal data. Even investigative reporters usually do not give home address of public figure, even if it is an address of, say, surprisingly expensive villa that was a gift from mafia ;) They say there is such villa etc, but not address.

            – Mołot
            Apr 26 at 9:55






            2




            2





            @Molot: Ah, understood. But "personal data" under GDPR is defined as "any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person"—it's a lot wider in scope than just home addresses etc, and certainly covers the sorts of facts disclosed by investigative reporters.

            – eggyal
            Apr 26 at 9:58





            @Molot: Ah, understood. But "personal data" under GDPR is defined as "any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person"—it's a lot wider in scope than just home addresses etc, and certainly covers the sorts of facts disclosed by investigative reporters.

            – eggyal
            Apr 26 at 9:58











            7














            Assuming you are in the US...



            Copyright will likely protect this author's expression of the facts. This means that you cannot copy phrases from the book (for example), but you can write a different book about the same event. (This is true no matter whose father the book is about, actually.) Copyright.gov says:




            Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed.




            In other words, it doesn't seem to me like you have a case for a copyright angle were you to sue.



            There may be other angles for you to pursue, but only a lawyer can tell you what those would be. There's just too little information to go on.






            share|improve this answer



















            • 2





              At this level, copyright is basically the same everywhere: copyright is about expression, not about the thing being expressed. There's no copyright case, here.

              – David Richerby
              Apr 26 at 11:43
















            7














            Assuming you are in the US...



            Copyright will likely protect this author's expression of the facts. This means that you cannot copy phrases from the book (for example), but you can write a different book about the same event. (This is true no matter whose father the book is about, actually.) Copyright.gov says:




            Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed.




            In other words, it doesn't seem to me like you have a case for a copyright angle were you to sue.



            There may be other angles for you to pursue, but only a lawyer can tell you what those would be. There's just too little information to go on.






            share|improve this answer



















            • 2





              At this level, copyright is basically the same everywhere: copyright is about expression, not about the thing being expressed. There's no copyright case, here.

              – David Richerby
              Apr 26 at 11:43














            7












            7








            7







            Assuming you are in the US...



            Copyright will likely protect this author's expression of the facts. This means that you cannot copy phrases from the book (for example), but you can write a different book about the same event. (This is true no matter whose father the book is about, actually.) Copyright.gov says:




            Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed.




            In other words, it doesn't seem to me like you have a case for a copyright angle were you to sue.



            There may be other angles for you to pursue, but only a lawyer can tell you what those would be. There's just too little information to go on.






            share|improve this answer













            Assuming you are in the US...



            Copyright will likely protect this author's expression of the facts. This means that you cannot copy phrases from the book (for example), but you can write a different book about the same event. (This is true no matter whose father the book is about, actually.) Copyright.gov says:




            Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed.




            In other words, it doesn't seem to me like you have a case for a copyright angle were you to sue.



            There may be other angles for you to pursue, but only a lawyer can tell you what those would be. There's just too little information to go on.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Apr 25 at 7:19









            LaurelLaurel

            1,543117




            1,543117








            • 2





              At this level, copyright is basically the same everywhere: copyright is about expression, not about the thing being expressed. There's no copyright case, here.

              – David Richerby
              Apr 26 at 11:43














            • 2





              At this level, copyright is basically the same everywhere: copyright is about expression, not about the thing being expressed. There's no copyright case, here.

              – David Richerby
              Apr 26 at 11:43








            2




            2





            At this level, copyright is basically the same everywhere: copyright is about expression, not about the thing being expressed. There's no copyright case, here.

            – David Richerby
            Apr 26 at 11:43





            At this level, copyright is basically the same everywhere: copyright is about expression, not about the thing being expressed. There's no copyright case, here.

            – David Richerby
            Apr 26 at 11:43











            4
















            Names, characters, businesses, places, events, locales, and incidents are either the products of the author's imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental.





            This common disclaimer exists for a reason.



            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_persons_fictitious_disclaimer



            This is why I am not convinced that what the person did is legal... (especially if your dad isn't a public figure)



            If you have any concern, you should consult a lawyer. But I think you have a legitimate case.






            share|improve this answer
























            • +1 for bringing up the naming issue

              – Bernat
              Apr 26 at 7:49






            • 5





              The disclaimer is placed to reduce the risk of someone claiming that the book says something that is untrue about them and that causes harm to their reputation (libel). It is certainly not a legal requirement for works to be imagined or fictitious.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:09
















            4
















            Names, characters, businesses, places, events, locales, and incidents are either the products of the author's imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental.





            This common disclaimer exists for a reason.



            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_persons_fictitious_disclaimer



            This is why I am not convinced that what the person did is legal... (especially if your dad isn't a public figure)



            If you have any concern, you should consult a lawyer. But I think you have a legitimate case.






            share|improve this answer
























            • +1 for bringing up the naming issue

              – Bernat
              Apr 26 at 7:49






            • 5





              The disclaimer is placed to reduce the risk of someone claiming that the book says something that is untrue about them and that causes harm to their reputation (libel). It is certainly not a legal requirement for works to be imagined or fictitious.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:09














            4












            4








            4









            Names, characters, businesses, places, events, locales, and incidents are either the products of the author's imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental.





            This common disclaimer exists for a reason.



            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_persons_fictitious_disclaimer



            This is why I am not convinced that what the person did is legal... (especially if your dad isn't a public figure)



            If you have any concern, you should consult a lawyer. But I think you have a legitimate case.






            share|improve this answer















            Names, characters, businesses, places, events, locales, and incidents are either the products of the author's imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental.





            This common disclaimer exists for a reason.



            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_persons_fictitious_disclaimer



            This is why I am not convinced that what the person did is legal... (especially if your dad isn't a public figure)



            If you have any concern, you should consult a lawyer. But I think you have a legitimate case.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Apr 25 at 22:14









            ashleyleeashleylee

            1




            1













            • +1 for bringing up the naming issue

              – Bernat
              Apr 26 at 7:49






            • 5





              The disclaimer is placed to reduce the risk of someone claiming that the book says something that is untrue about them and that causes harm to their reputation (libel). It is certainly not a legal requirement for works to be imagined or fictitious.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:09



















            • +1 for bringing up the naming issue

              – Bernat
              Apr 26 at 7:49






            • 5





              The disclaimer is placed to reduce the risk of someone claiming that the book says something that is untrue about them and that causes harm to their reputation (libel). It is certainly not a legal requirement for works to be imagined or fictitious.

              – eggyal
              Apr 26 at 8:09

















            +1 for bringing up the naming issue

            – Bernat
            Apr 26 at 7:49





            +1 for bringing up the naming issue

            – Bernat
            Apr 26 at 7:49




            5




            5





            The disclaimer is placed to reduce the risk of someone claiming that the book says something that is untrue about them and that causes harm to their reputation (libel). It is certainly not a legal requirement for works to be imagined or fictitious.

            – eggyal
            Apr 26 at 8:09





            The disclaimer is placed to reduce the risk of someone claiming that the book says something that is untrue about them and that causes harm to their reputation (libel). It is certainly not a legal requirement for works to be imagined or fictitious.

            – eggyal
            Apr 26 at 8:09


















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Writing Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fwriting.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f44777%2fcan-someone-publish-a-story-that-happened-to-you%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Bruad Bilen | Luke uk diar | NawigatsjuunCommonskategorii: BruadCommonskategorii: RunstükenWikiquote: Bruad

            What is the offset in a seaplane's hull?

            Slayer Innehåll Historia | Stil, komposition och lyrik | Bandets betydelse och framgångar | Sidoprojekt och samarbeten | Kontroverser | Medlemmar | Utmärkelser och nomineringar | Turnéer och festivaler | Diskografi | Referenser | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmenywww.slayer.net”Metal Massacre vol. 1””Metal Massacre vol. 3””Metal Massacre Volume III””Show No Mercy””Haunting the Chapel””Live Undead””Hell Awaits””Reign in Blood””Reign in Blood””Gold & Platinum – Reign in Blood””Golden Gods Awards Winners”originalet”Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Looks Back On 37-Year Career In New Video Series: Part Two””South of Heaven””Gold & Platinum – South of Heaven””Seasons in the Abyss””Gold & Platinum - Seasons in the Abyss””Divine Intervention””Divine Intervention - Release group by Slayer””Gold & Platinum - Divine Intervention””Live Intrusion””Undisputed Attitude””Abolish Government/Superficial Love””Release “Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer” by Various Artists””Diabolus in Musica””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””God Hates Us All””Systematic - Relationships””War at the Warfield””Gold & Platinum - War at the Warfield””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””Gold & Platinum - Still Reigning””Metallica, Slayer, Iron Mauden Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Eternal Pyre””Eternal Pyre - Slayer release group””Eternal Pyre””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Bullet-For My Valentine booed at Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Unholy Aliance””The End Of Slayer?””Slayer: We Could Thrash Out Two More Albums If We're Fast Enough...””'The Unholy Alliance: Chapter III' UK Dates Added”originalet”Megadeth And Slayer To Co-Headline 'Canadian Carnage' Trek”originalet”World Painted Blood””Release “World Painted Blood” by Slayer””Metallica Heading To Cinemas””Slayer, Megadeth To Join Forces For 'European Carnage' Tour - Dec. 18, 2010”originalet”Slayer's Hanneman Contracts Acute Infection; Band To Bring In Guest Guitarist””Cannibal Corpse's Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer's Guest Guitarist”originalet”Slayer’s Jeff Hanneman Dead at 49””Dave Lombardo Says He Made Only $67,000 In 2011 While Touring With Slayer””Slayer: We Do Not Agree With Dave Lombardo's Substance Or Timeline Of Events””Slayer Welcomes Drummer Paul Bostaph Back To The Fold””Slayer Hope to Unveil Never-Before-Heard Jeff Hanneman Material on Next Album””Slayer Debut New Song 'Implode' During Surprise Golden Gods Appearance””Release group Repentless by Slayer””Repentless - Slayer - Credits””Slayer””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer - to release comic book "Repentless #1"””Slayer To Release 'Repentless' 6.66" Vinyl Box Set””BREAKING NEWS: Slayer Announce Farewell Tour””Slayer Recruit Lamb of God, Anthrax, Behemoth + Testament for Final Tour””Slayer lägger ner efter 37 år””Slayer Announces Second North American Leg Of 'Final' Tour””Final World Tour””Slayer Announces Final European Tour With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Tour Europe With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Play 'Last French Show Ever' At Next Year's Hellfst””Slayer's Final World Tour Will Extend Into 2019””Death Angel's Rob Cavestany On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour: 'Some Of Us Could See This Coming'””Testament Has No Plans To Retire Anytime Soon, Says Chuck Billy””Anthrax's Scott Ian On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour Plans: 'I Was Surprised And I Wasn't Surprised'””Slayer””Slayer's Morbid Schlock””Review/Rock; For Slayer, the Mania Is the Message””Slayer - Biography””Slayer - Reign In Blood”originalet”Dave Lombardo””An exclusive oral history of Slayer”originalet”Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman”originalet”Thinking Out Loud: Slayer's Kerry King on hair metal, Satan and being polite””Slayer Lyrics””Slayer - Biography””Most influential artists for extreme metal music””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dies aged 49””Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer””Gateway to Hell: A Tribute to Slayer””Covered In Blood””Slayer: The Origins of Thrash in San Francisco, CA.””Why They Rule - #6 Slayer”originalet”Guitar World's 100 Greatest Heavy Metal Guitarists Of All Time”originalet”The fans have spoken: Slayer comes out on top in readers' polls”originalet”Tribute to Jeff Hanneman (1964-2013)””Lamb Of God Frontman: We Sound Like A Slayer Rip-Off””BEHEMOTH Frontman Pays Tribute To SLAYER's JEFF HANNEMAN””Slayer, Hatebreed Doing Double Duty On This Year's Ozzfest””System of a Down””Lacuna Coil’s Andrea Ferro Talks Influences, Skateboarding, Band Origins + More””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Into The Lungs of Hell””Slayer rules - en utställning om fans””Slayer and Their Fans Slashed Through a No-Holds-Barred Night at Gas Monkey””Home””Slayer””Gold & Platinum - The Big 4 Live from Sofia, Bulgaria””Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Kerry King””2008-02-23: Wiltern, Los Angeles, CA, USA””Slayer's Kerry King To Perform With Megadeth Tonight! - Oct. 21, 2010”originalet”Dave Lombardo - Biography”Slayer Case DismissedArkiveradUltimate Classic Rock: Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dead at 49.”Slayer: "We could never do any thing like Some Kind Of Monster..."””Cannibal Corpse'S Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer'S Guest Guitarist | The Official Slayer Site”originalet”Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Kerrang! Awards 2006 Blog: Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Kerrang! Awards 2013: Kerrang! Legend”originalet”Metallica, Slayer, Iron Maien Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Bullet For My Valentine Booed At Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer's Concert History””Slayer - Relationships””Slayer - Releases”Slayers officiella webbplatsSlayer på MusicBrainzOfficiell webbplatsSlayerSlayerr1373445760000 0001 1540 47353068615-5086262726cb13906545x(data)6033143kn20030215029