posted
I apologize to those I was going to send my story to for critique. Any except my first, I will be more comfortable. I have nothing against teens reading it; in fact, I hope they do read the story. However, I have to look at this from a legal standpoint, as it is an abuse survival story. There are no explicit scenes. I am sure TV is worse than my book during most prime time shows. However, parents may see it different. If a teen checked my book out of the library, they most likely would not sue the library. If they bought it at the bookstore, they would not sue the bookstore. If I email it for critique, it could be perceived as contributing to the delinquency of a minor. I have no reason to believe it would, it would be more likely to help them see patterns of abuse, and break the cycle, whether for themselves, or others.
However, in today’s sue happy world, I am not going to take the chance. Future books will not be in this genre, so I will allow them to be critiqued. Again, I apologize for the confusion.
posted
So let me see if I have the facts straight...
You have written R-rated or potentially R-rated material and, given the new open policy of this site in regards to minors, you may be, knowingly or unknowingly, sending this material to "children" under the age of 18.
Regardless of all the recent discussion about what is really an adult or what is not, LEGALLY, an adult is 18 years of age or older and sites that allow young participants in are considered, under the law, "family oriented." What this means to you is that if you send such material to participants who may be under the age of 18 (whether they tell you they are or not, because you met them on ano pen site) you are opening yourself up to law suits.
This does not, of course, mean that you WILL get sued for sending it. But if some parent of a sixteen-year-old with a weird religious complex about sex and violence being presented to their child sees it then you will have great difficulty fighting it. You send the wrong topic to the wrong person (ie sexually explicit material) and someone might get it in their head that you are doing worse that contributing to their delinguency.
This is a key reason that I object to Hatrack's new open policy. I have not posted on F&F since that happened, and will be very reluctant to do so in the future. I will be carefully screening my material to make sure it is no worse than PG, which is difficult because I'm not entirely certain what material is PG vs. PG-13 vs. R. Telll me all you want, it ends up being a gut feeling sometimes.
I would guess that there is little chance of you actually being sued for sending out this material. For one thing, we're all writers here, even the young ones. And for those teenagers who read this, I am not questioning your ability to handle the material. Frankly, I think most are able to "handle" that stuff younger than we give them credit for. But this was a question about the threat of lawsuits. I do believe it exists.
Note: I am not a lawyer and this should not be considered legal advice. (Don't want to get sued LOL )
[This message has been edited by Christine (edited July 12, 2005).]
[This message has been edited by Christine (edited July 12, 2005).]
posted
Woe the citizens of an extremely litigious society. Gone is personal responsibility, and common sense. And anything that happens, no matter how innocent, is fair game for a lawsuit.
I can't say I blame anyone for not wanting to send out stories. I won't stop because I'd love to see anyone sue me here in England -- different rules apply. Ha! Take that lawyers of America, you greedy jerks! (not all lawyers, just the ones that are jerks, of course).
But I had the pleasure of knowing one of the exceptions to the rule. My husband's grandfather was one of two lawyers in the rural town that he (husband) grew up in.
The guy practiced there for 60 years, and had clients that had been with him for nearly that long when he retired at 90. He did taxes for half the town, including some folks who would show up in town once a year when they came down from the mountains at tax time.
I'd love to write a book of stories about him - he was a fascinating (and truly nice) guy.
posted
Abby, I think you may be worrying overmuch.
I do accept that the US is a far more litigious society than the UK (though we are making some strenuous efforts to catch up). But there is one important rule of lawsuits; you only sue someone who can afford to pay.
If someone bumps into you in the street and spills indelible ink on your shirt, you don't sue them; you sue the ink manufacturer. If a waitress spills hot coffee in your lap, you don't sue her; you sue the restaurant chain.
Individuals are very rarely sued, because suits cost money, and the lawyers won't be interested unless they think they can get a nice chunky cut of some settlement.
I really think you should be prepared to send it out. Your book is an abuse survival story, and (I very much get the impression from your posts) that it's grounded in some kind of personal experience. Abuse survival is about overcoming fear. Overcome this one.
posted
A couple of things: lawsuits aren't always about money and they can go after individuals in a number of ways.
First, individuals do get sued. Check out the recent actions of the recording industry if you'd like some examples of big businesses sueing individuals. Also, individuals can get sued by other individuals in small claims court.
Second, if an individual happens to have money, or ever makes money, a lawsuit can take that away. Oh, you thought you were going to make money off your first novel? Think again!
Third, I believe that OSC could be in danger of such lawsuits as the host of this site. Because you're right...no one's going to go after me, but if I "hurt" a child (teengaer) by means of this site...well, there's your target.
One thing Americans are is creative. They find the right targets and the right arguments to get their money. It's like the example about the ink getting spilled...there are people who could get hurt here.
As to the not all lawsuits are about money...well, that's true too. Despite the stereotype of the greedy American lawsuit, many individuals go after others because of some principle. There's no principle guiding sueuing McDonald's over a hot cup of coffee but there is principle guiding harmful affects on children. (real or imagined...keep in mind that not everyone is entirely rational)
posted
I'd just like to point out that the "new" policy isn't new. It's been the stated policy for as long as I've been around. This forum has never had any mechanism for preventing minors from viewing it or joining. We've merely made it clear that "I'm only a teenager" is not going to be accepted as an excuse for juvinille behavior.
If you check most any open writing/critiquing site, you'll discover that almost none of them provide any mechanism that would prevent minors from being members of the site.
As far as legal liability goes, if your work could be legally interpreted as "appealing to the prurient interest" or is clearly hate speech, then you might have a problem. If not, then as long as you describe it accurately and only send it to persons that have specifically requested it, you're fine.
Worrying about entirely unreasonable lawsuits isn't worth anyone's time. You can be sued for having the same last name as someone's cat, you know. They can claim unlimited damages. And, if things go badly, they can even win. Being paranoid won't protect you.
posted
Christine - Those are mostly fair points, although in the case of the record industry, it's definitely a "pour decourager les autres" approach that they're taking which I don't feel is applicable to the kind of issues we were discussing.
I really find it hard to imagine, though, from what Abby has said about her work, that it's the kind of thing that anyone could reasonably object to (though I do accept your final point - not everybody is reasonable!). It's certainly in a very different league from, say, Gecko's contribution over in F&F (trust me... don't go there), which really is a can of worms and which I fully expect to disappear Real Soon Now.
Ultimately, I guess I just feel that in the long term, the only way to beat the litigious society is not to give in to it. If you'll excuse the parallels with another debate that's ongoing in the light of certain recent events; if you change your life because of their actions, even as you believe their actions to be wrong - then you're letting them win.
(Edited because Survivor's post crept in as I was typing this as a reply to Christine - wanted ot make sure no-one thought I was answering Survivor's points)
[This message has been edited by tchernabyelo (edited July 12, 2005).]
posted
tchernabyelo: Your last point is quite fair and true. You can't live your life in fear that some idiot is going to sue you for breathing loudly in their cat's presence and frightening it. In a way, it has become a legal terrorist tactic in that it has successfully terrorized a great many people into doing/thinking/acting stupid things for fear of lawsuits.
Here's a terrible example: If someone breaks into your home in America and you defend yourself...if he gets injured, he can sue you and such suits have been successful on a great many ocassions. I've even heard cops suggest that if someone breaks into your house you shouldn't just try to disable them. Killing in self-defense is ok, maiming gets you sued.
BTW, SUrvivor, until recently this workshop did clearly say it was for people who were 18 and over. There were two links, two bold-faced headings: one for the younguns and one for the adults. Obviously, this does not actively prevent people under 18 from participating and it never proposed to do so. It's the same as those links that say "click here if you're over 18." It's not that a 17-year-old can't click a link, it's that such doorways provide at least some protection from lawsuits.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
)
