Reader Question: Do I need to secure rights to a book I'm relying on for research?

Open Forum question from meg:

I'm playing around with an idea for a script now that's based on an historical event that as far I can see hasn't ever been done. I've just started my research. There is one well-known book on the topic as well as several others. I plan to read these books but also to do my own research. At what point does my research obligate me to perhaps consider seeking the rights to a particular author's work? Would the answer change if my protag is a fictional character rather than a real person involved in this event?

Let me begin with my usual clarification: "I am not a lawyer, I don't even play one on TV." So if you want definitive legal advice, you should seek out an entertainment lawyer. Here is one online legal resource. Now that I've protected myself from any legal, moral, or spiritual responsibility, herewith the opinions of Scott Myers, Non-Esquire!

If the book(s) you use for research provide you information and background that you use generally per your story's development, you do not need to option its rights.

If the book(s) you use provide you specific incidents and/or people you use in your story, especially if those incidents and/or people are (A) significant and (B) you closely follow them in your story, then things get a bit blurry.

For example, you may have seen this which has recently been in the news:

An Army sergeant has filed a multimillion dollar lawsuit against the makers of Oscar-nominated film "The Hurt Locker" just days before the Academy Awards ceremony, claiming the central character in the film is based on him.

In the suit, Master Sergeant Jeffrey S. Sarver said he believes screenwriter and producer Mark Boal based the film's main character, a cocky and reckless army sergeant, almost entirely on him.(Click here for the full complaint).

Sarver's suit characterizes the critically acclaimed film as "... nothing more than the exploitation of a real life honorable, courageous, and long serving member of our country's armed forces, by greedy, multi-billion dollar 'entertainment' corporations."

So when you say "my protag is a fictional character rather than a real person involved in this event," I guess the key question is, "How fictional?" Screenwriter Boal would doubtless argue that the Protagonist of The Hurt Locker Staff Sergeant William James is a 'fictional' character. Master Sergeant Sarver doesn't quite see it that way -- and he's willing to go after "greedy, muti-billion dollar 'entertainment' corporations" to prove his point.

Since you have come to that fork-in-the-road -- "Should I use the actual historical character in my story or fictionalize them" -- and opted for the fictional route, then perhaps my best advice would be to really fictionalize the character. You can include what they do, which is presumably the most important aspect of the narrative function as it's tied to the plot, but create a personality for the character which is distinct from the historical individual.

Back in the day of MOW's (Movies Of The Week), they would often have something like this in their tagline: "Based upon the true life story..." or "Inspired by..." What I'm suggesting is that you're safer taking the latter approach, rather than the former.

You might also check this out: "The Rights of Publicity and Privacy" on the website publicdomainsherpa.com.

I know we have some legal eagles as GITS readers. Please advise Meg in comments if you've got anything to add - or heaven forbid, something on which you can correct me.