Thread replies: 3
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: murdoch.jpg (639KB, 990x1377px) Image search:
[Google]
639KB, 990x1377px
Do you think novelists, directors, and other creators should have a moral obligation to depict historical figure's lives and actions in as truthful a manner as possible? For instance, do you think that writers/directors/etc should avoid attributing negative actions to deceased figures out of respect for them or their families, if they have living descendants? Are there any legal issues that can occur when using historical figures, outside of any moral guidelines?
For instance, James Cameron's decision to have William Murdoch accept bribes and shoot a man was met outrage by his descendants.
>>
wouldn't know
on one hand people should know better than to accept fictional works as factual reality
on the other hand they do it anyway so it makes the artist look irresponsible when he depicts a corrupt businessman or criminal as the model of human achievement
>>
>Are there any legal issues that can occur when using historical figures, outside of any moral guidelines?
As long as they are dead themselves, and you aren't including any living people, no there won't be legal issues. Legal issues occur because of defamation and invasion of privacy, which don't apply to the dead.
The only exceptions are if you're using a living memory dead person's actual likeness, voice, etc. Kind of like how Disney had to get permission from Carrie Fischer's estate to continue using her likeness, meaning photos/video/voice, in their material. Or how Lucile Ball's estate goes after people making fan Lucy merch.
Thread posts: 3
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1