legal considerations

Post Reply New Topic

what are the legalities involved in including a section about politics and autism (particularly certain nonprofit foundations) in a book I am authoring.

Basically what can I get away with and still fall under the good side of the law in case I get sued.

The short answer: it depends on a) where you are and b) what you plan to say.
You may find that, depending on where you live, you have certain legal constraints. Some are fairly reasonable, things like not committing libel or inciting hatred. However, other governments can be very strict. You don't, for example, want to publish a book about democracy that's anti-Communist if you live in China.

If you live in a reasonable and democratic jurisdiction, you shouldn't have any problems in stating a personal opinion as long as you stay within the relevant law.

The long answer: seek legal advice. (That is not a long answer in and of itself, but it will become one.)

it would be particular to the US.

I'm trying to think what you are intending to do that might theoretically fall outside the law. Are you intending to misatribute quotes to people who did not actually say things? Can't do that. Are you intending to lift chunks of text off websites and pass it off as your own? Can't do that either.

Without knowing what you are planning to do it's utterly impossible to say whether or not it is legal.

criticism of certain nonprofits

no misattribution and I always cite my work

Criticism is perfectly legal in the U.S., There are countless books criticizing pretty much everything you can think of. Just be careful that any statistics you use are accurate and that you attribute everything to a verifiable source unless it is purely your opinion and stated as such.

If you want to criticize an organization and stay within the legal bounds, follow the lead of already published authors who have done that. Read pretty much anything by Michael Moore or Rush Limbaugh to see how it's done.

to what extent does it become libel?

I'm not really sure. That's why I recommended reading Moore and Limbaugh. They are both extremely aggresive in their criticisms yet haven't been sued for their books. In any case, I'm pretty sure that any publishing house knows exactly where the line is and will let you know if you step over it when you send ion a manuscript.

Make sure you don't publish in the UK. That also means no electronic edition that can be accessed from the UK. The UK libel laws are both archaic and heavily biased in favour of the plaintiff. That has created libel tourism, where anyone with deep enough pockets sues for libel in the UK if they can claim the allegedly libelous statement has been published there. I think a web site accessible from the UK counts as publishing there (you should be in the clear if someone else quotes you online, but ask to be sure). Even if you successfully defend yourself, UK libel cases are very expensive. For an example of how ridiculous the law is, look at the case of Simon Singh

the only problem I would see with that is having to read Moore or Limbaugh

interesting...

what about Amazon?

WOW. Are things really that bad in general in the UK, or is this an isolated incident? If it isn't isolated and that's really the way things are, remind me never, ever to publish anything at all in the UK. And I consider myself an Anglophile, too. Yikes!

If you're a US resident, and the material is written/published/hosted in the US, what can the UK courts do to you?

http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/Term ... 7/alpha/L/

Just be careful that what you are saying is truthful.

http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectua ... belfrm.htm

Libel is virtually impossible to prove in court, so you're safe. People publish extremely slanderous things without facing any legal repercussions. Just write your book, and don't worry about it.

EDIT: One of the first important legal cases in the US concerned libel and established a more stringent definition for proving libel in a court of law. This began our tradition of heavy emphasis on free speech, including criticism of powerful groups and people. The case in question involved criticism of a governor, but I don't remember the name at the moment.

Last edited by Orwell on 14 Aug 2009, 8:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

useful.

so avoid explicit identification, stick to public figures with documented quotes and stick to the truth as a defense.