Pop culture references and publication

The use of pop culture references is allowable, so long as the reference is considered fair use, or within the public domain Unfortunately, the lines are really, really blurry. There's no restriction on public domain references.

You can give the name of the song. I don't think you can quote it, though. No idea about Star Trek or Spock, though.

If you're serious about publishing, any editor you send a manuscript with pop culture references in it will know the rules and if they intend to publish your work, will let you know whether it works or not.

Can we maybe make a sticky post about this? Seems to be something a lot of people have concerns about.

As far as I can tell:

* Public Domain characters are free to use. That's anything published before 1922, so Dracula, Frankenstein, King Arthur, Robin Hood, Sherlock Holmes, anything from Shakespeare ... None of those are under copyright any more, so you can do what you like with them.

* Likewise, characters from established mythologies are fair game - Greek, Roman and Egyptian gods for instance. Current deity figures are also fair game though of course discretion is advised.

* Actual real or historical people may feature, though defamation laws apply of course.

* Real-life brand names and trademarks may be mentioned, though again defamation laws apply. If you want your character to eat at a fast-food restaurant and come down with food poisoning, it might be as well to make it a fictional chain. If you just want to mention that he grabbed a quick meal at McDonald's, that ought to be fine.

However, any such restrictions only really apply to published works distributed to the public. A publishing house will check these things before approving the final draft, and if it's just going to sit on your hard drive and be shown to a couple of friends, then you can write whatever you like...

Do you know where the line is for defamation of public figures? For example, is it okay to comment negatively on something a public figure did do, but not okay to have them do something that would be controversial or wrong?

In a lot of modern-set novels there are made-up presidents who might have eerie similarities to the actual folks in office at the time. Is that because the author needed a different character, or because using the real one would tempt the laws?

Thank you! This covers it nicely. I agree there should be a sticky post, as these types of questions come up over and over.

One thing I'd add is about quoting song lyrics (or movie lines, or bits of poetry, or TV scripts, or whatever): If the song or poem is in the public domain, then it's okay to be quoted. It'll be free, and there should be no legal ramifications. If the song, poem, movie quote, play quote, or whatever else, is still under copyright, then you'd have to get permission from the copyright holder to use the quote before the piece could be published.

Of course, if the piece is getting published, then the author would likely have an agent and editor on his / her side. The agent and / or editor, I understand, often assist the author in getting the permissions, and in deciding if the quotation in question is worth keeping in the manuscript. There are usually costs incurred -- anywhere from a token amount to several thousand dollars. One author I knew had to pay around $800 for a small song quote he wanted at the beginning of his manuscript (which was being published by an imprint of Random House). So think twice before you (the general "you") insist that every one of your chapters begin with a verse from a My Chemical Romance song.

There's an element of that to it - you can write what you like if it's demonstrably true. George W Bush did make the decision to invade Iraq and no-one can touch you for saying so. No-one can touch you for having another character say that it was a bad idea.

You can even usually get away with inventing a real person's thought processes out of wholecloth. If you say "Bush decided to invade Iraq because he had daddy issues after the previous Iraq war", then no-one can ever prove that. But likewise you can't prove otherwise either. Again, if a real person (or the relatives of a dead person) feel you have overdone it and grossly insulted them ("Bush decided to invade Iraq because he had a gay crush on Saddam"), then there may be a case.

Finally, you can have your real people do things they demonstrably didn't do. Again, it will depend on exactly what that thing is. If you have Bush turn up to speak to the troops in Iraq at a time when records show he was on a state visit to Tonga, no-one will probably mind. If you have Bush off playing golf with Rumsfeld on September 12, 2001, you might find that Bush's legal team objected to that more strongly.

The exact law will depend on where you are (and as has been pointed out, any publishing house will read it over for legal issues before publishing anyway), but the general principle is not to misrepresent a real person's character or actions and essentially it's all down to whether or not the party in question choose to take action.

Yes, if you make up a character then you can do what you like with them. All similarities are purely coincidental (as long as you don't name him "Bull Clontin" or something.) Tom Clancy does this - his presidents tend to either come to bad ends or be generally unsympathetic, so...

The other thing with making up your own president is that it doesn't date your piece as badly. Naming the president as Bill Clinton means that the action must take place between 1992 and 2000. Having him be a chummy guy from Arizona who has a way with the ladies and a lawyer wife?

______
If you can fly a Sopwith Camel, you can fly anything.

Another bit about real people, remember that dead people are fair game, especially if they've been dead for a while. You can say what you like about them, even outright lie about what they did or didn't do, and legally there's no problem. Now, saying something tasteless or offensive about a recently dead person who was actually well-respected and liked might not be particularly appreciated, on the other hand, but for entirely different reasons...

What about books? If a book is in the public domain, are there rules for mention of the title and author, or even quoting something from it? If a book is not in the public domain, how is it different? What about non-fiction books? In particular, I'm thinking about referencing century-old scientific literature.

I have some knowledge about copyright law, so I'll give this a shot:

Just referencing something in pop culture (a character on a TV show, the name of a song) is fine. You only really run into problems when you start quoting.

Public domain means that the copyright has expired, so if something (a Shakespeare play, for example) is in the public domain, you can quote from it as much as you want. No one owns the rights, so there's no one to get permission to use it from. A safe bet is that anything published more than 100 years ago is in the public domain and anything more recent than that is probably still under copyright.

Fair use under the copyright law means you can quote some from copyrighted materials without getting permission. How much you can quote depends on how long the source material is and who owns the rights, but generally: You can quote no more than 2 lines of a song, no more than 4 lines of a poem, and a paragraph or two of a longer work, depending on how long that work is.

But, of course, were you to get published, the publisher takes care of clearing permission. It's still good to know about these things, because sometimes the fees for clearing permission (especially for songs) can be quite steep and the different houses have different policies on whether or not the author is responsible for those fees. (The house where I used to work always paid permission fees, FWIW.)

As for writing about real people, parody exceptions in the copyright law means that (I think) talking about real people in the context of a fictional novel is fine. Libel comes into play if you're writing something about a real person and passing it off as fact, but the thing you're writing is demonstrably untrue and the publication of the information does harm to the career or reputation of the person you're writing about.

Hope that helps some!

I also just found this chart on public domain that people might find helpful:

http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/public-d.htm

The rules on libel and slander in the US are quite different from what they are in places like the UK. In the US it is very difficult for a "public figure" to sue and win, or at any rate at least win damages, for libel. I believe the logic here is that a public figure could and would be able to publicly (duh) defend themselves in the media, unlike the rest of us poor schlubs who don't get invited onto Larry King or Bill O'Reilly. But even for non-public figures you have to somehow prove that you've suffered an economic loss before you'll get any money damages, even if you can show that you've been libelled or slandered..which is also fairly difficult.

My very cursory understanding is that this is almost inverted in the UK, with the party bringing the action presumed to be in the right. Or at any rate subject to a much less stringent standard for proving the libel AND for winning monetary damages once libel is shown. Sorry, but I have no idea how the rest of the world works beyond that, honestly. Just figured I'd mention this since everyone on this thread seems to presume a one size fits all approach.

Edit to add: I knew there was a recent example of this, but couldn't remember what the heck it was. Came to me two seconds after I hit the "post" button.Tom Cruise: An Unauthorized Biography can only be sold to customers in the US and Canada. As in Amazon will not ship to you if you're elsewhere (see the Amazon page) and no editions outside North America are planned. It appears Tom Cruise would NOT have a case for anything in the US resembling libel, but very well might in the UK or Australia. Kind of stupid, since I imagine copies are available via e-bay and the like, but I guess a publisher could legitimately claim ignorance of what a reseller would do.

I'm not sure if this goes here, but it seems close enough.
What if you use the current president (his name isn't important. The war in Iraq is), he does pretty much nothing in the scene he's present for, but your character kills him?
If there are problems with that, can it be avoided by either: Just stating that it happened, not writing a scene where it occurs OR not naming the president?

Hold out for product placement fees and get paid for it!

In the US, elected offiicials are "public figures" and subject to be used in fiction, (as long as your "fiction" is not an attempt to grossly libel them or a vieled attempt to actually incite murder for example). Most celebreties are also in the "public figure" category, but your neighbor, not so much.

----------------------------------
"To practice any art, no matter how well or badly, is a way to make your soul grow. So do it." - Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. (1922-2007)

2006 - Famine: A Novel - failed
2007 - A Midsummer Night's Dream...IN SPACE! - on hold

Here's some random information for those of you thinking of writing in comments (mostly negative) about living people... From my experience as a freelance editor.

Editors usually have a checklist to sort through for things like this. They look for material that identifies a person (living or dead), this includes voices, likenesses, or obvious descriptions - even if you don't actually name the person. Descriptions of dead people need to be as accurate as those of living people, because even though libel suits wouldn't be allowed, there are other lawsuits that could be applied.

They check to see if the person is a private individual (this is more sensitive, obviously, than if the person were in the public eye) or a public person (there is more room to comment on public figures because of First Amendment rights).

Editors also check to see if the material (description, mention of the pop star, whatever) would negatively influence a reader's opinion of that person, or reflect badly on their character. Opinions are fine as long as they do not imply that there are defamatory facts underlying the opinion. Your editor will want to make sure that facts cannot be concluded from the opinions. In other words, if the comments you make can harm the reputation of the person in question, it's probably not a good idea to include it.

If the statement you include about the person in question is true, you'll have to provide documentation. This is so even if you're writing a fiction book and this public figure is a character in your book. Unless it would be impossible for a reasonable reader to interpret your characterization of this public figure as an assertion of actual fact.

You run into big problems when you pick up a rumor and say bad things about someone in accusation. Make sure that if you're saying anything negative, it's constructed as an opinion, and not as fact.

What about a character using an iPod? Is that fine?

Also, what if the character is talking about a public figure and says, "Oh, I heard that she..[insert rumor here]."?

I've heard two differing views on using brand names. One is that you need permission and the other is they shouldn't have any problem since it's free publicity. I think with iPod, it might be better to use mp3 player. The bonus is that is two words compared to iPod's one word, so you're doing yourself a favor there. ;)

Besides the legal issue, it's also worth considering the fact that using pop culture references will irreversibly 'date' your novel. What I mean by that is, even though everyone in modern times might understand what you're saying, in ten, twenty, fifty years someone who reads it might not (and immortality is the point in getting published, right?). If they do understand it, then it will still place the novel into an exact time, maybe more exact than you would like (especially since in that case you need to make it match exactly the time that other references are). If you can avoid it, then you should.

Explaining a made-up pop reference can also lead to extra words! Saying something like 'the local fast food restaurant, McYourMother' is six words, while 'McDonald's' is only one. :)

You can absolutely comment on something that someone has done, celebrity or otherwise. What you can't do is make a real life person do something. That crosses the fine line between free speech and libel.

However if you change the name you can do whatever you want. XD

I have a question, with regard to websites. I am an active member and regular participant in an online forum. Now, this forum serves as a home base for a certain group of people. Since all of the main characters in my novel identify with this group, it is realistic to expect that they will have some knowledge and experience of this forum. Will I get in trouble for mentioning the name of this forum and describing some of what is posted there (not quoting specific posts, but perhaps mentioning a thread that was in the "Meetup Mart" subforum, or something)? Of course, being a member, it would be easy enough to ask for permission, but I don't know if that's necessary.

I just want to be certain this would be all right before I go ahead and write about it. This forum would be a very important plot point, and I would hate to write the entire story centering on the forum, only to have a publisher say, "Nope, can't do that, let's cut out all references to this website," and suddenly my entire premise is torn to shreds right in front of me. ;___;

EDIT: Also, I apologize if this is too vague. If you need more details, I would be more than happy to provide the name of the site, information about this "group of people," examples of specific threads, etc. I just didn't know if there was already a general rule with regard to online forums.

Generally most pop culture references are allowed. It is only brand names and sometimes slogans that get you into trouble. Like instead of saying "a Hershey's bar," say, "a chocolate bar." It doesn't take away from your writing, but it does sasve you from any problems later on with editing. Of course, if you still want to use these brand names or slogans, you can, but you might have to fix them later when copy editing.

I'm not sure that's true. I recently read "2012" by Whitley Strieber. Ann Coulter makes an appearance near the end of the book ... as a lizard, well a female lizardman, (which isn't as odd as it sounds since the novel is largely about lizardmen). She's actually working for the good guys (humans & good lizards) by going undercover as an evil lizard. This is obviously far beyond anything connected to reality, but it is a clear and direct use of a real person in fiction, doing things they have never done (at least I assume she's never been a lizard -- good or evil).

Uh, not so far as I know... If there's any new rule where you can't mention, say, Something Awful, it's entirely news to me. :P

And anyway, I rather doubt a publisher would do that, especially if it's obviously important to the story.

From a craft standpoint, keep in mind that pop culture references will date your story severely. In five to ten years many, if not most of them will be out of date to the point of being totally obscure or laughably awkward.

I try and avoid pop-culture references because sooner or later they might become dated. But I do pop them in every now and again.
If I have to, I'll mention major brands such as coca cola and Sony and so forth because they'll always be around.
But sayings and catchphrases that are the big thing of the moment are things I try and avoid.
I tried it once in an older piece of work and when I came to read it a year later it seemed out of date and I had to rewrite.

You know, I realized something about people fearing references of any sort for fear that it will "date" their writing: This is not necessarily a bad thing.

Unless specifically set in another time period, a novel is implicitly assumed to take place in the year that it was written. There will come a point where it is impossible to mistake a novel for taking place in any other time period, because dating itself is _inevitable_, and more things than you realize will tie a story to a particular time period. But why should this be a bad thing? Sometimes that dating can be as fuzzy as "sometime during the 90s", but it's still going to be clear that it takes place in a particular decade. The 80s was different from the 90s, and the 70s different from that, etc. I can always tell at a glance when a movie was made in (and intended to be set in) the 80s. (Often just by looking at the hairstyles... 80s hair, eek.)

I remember when reading the Harry Potter novels, that the author was very careful not to put in any explicit recent dates. Their lack felt forced and completely unnecessary, as even with the heavy fantasy elements, it's impossible for the novels to take place in any time other than the 90s.

The only time when "dating" a novel is a bad thing is when you're _trying_ to set it in a period other than the period you're writing it in. Near-future science fiction is the primary casualty of this effect. But I'll happily forgive science fiction written in the 60s for sounding like it was written in the 60s... because it _was_ written in the 60s, and they had no idea what the next few decades were really going to be like.

Or write it now and just make it specifically about now. Everything in novels like American Psycho or The Great Gatsby became dated five minutes after they were published, but it doesn't matter because they were stories of their times and not just set in some vague, undefined "present day". The moment pop culture moves on, you get to claim that the references in your story are retro instead of dated :)

Hey, (my first post)

I have been thinking about this, as my novel hinges on pop culture... specifically a rather well known chicken chain which has recently started rebranding using it's former long name as opposed to a 3 letter acronym.

When considering pop culture, I think of one of my favorite authors. William Gibson uses brand names and pop culture references sparingly, but to great effect in many of his books.

Galoiese(sp?) cigarettes have a particular flavor and contribute strongly to the vividness of the setting in erm ... I think Neuromancer. Also, the IPod plays a role in Spook Country as a result of it's ability to store data.

Of course he has plenty of made up or at least unknown to me, brands from Japan.

I actually think some companies would do well to co-opt his made up brands and logos as a sort of reverse pop culture cache.

Think about how cool it would be to own a Dynacorp computer ... or whatever that brand is in Terminator.

Anyway, I have seen every aproach published in Analog magazine over the years.

It may sound like the party line around here, but just write.

Joel

Well, hmmm. I just got through a major scene in my novel (a memorial service) by using a dozen or so lines from the Episcopal Church's Book of Common Prayer. Not exactly pop culture, but it is copyrighted. 1982.

Hmm. Guess I'll keep it in for word count purposes, but I wonder how much they'd want (would my offerings count?? ;))

Gina