I want someone to Write a Book about my Life

I' d like someone to write a book about my life.

Wonder why someone would buy this book? You' re reading a novel and going straight to your laptop to write yours! Her life might not be interesting enough to make a great memory, especially when no one knows who you are. Do not place your identity in the hands of others. I' m writing fiction because it's a nice place to hide.

Are you able to tell your own true story, even if it affects the privacy of your lovers, friends and family?

The autobiographer and memoir sometimes face sensitive juridical problems when writing about matters of their own personal existence that are inextricably linked to the personal world. Is it possible for a women to describe the personal detail of her sexual existence in a truthful way if she can identify her spouse and certain parts of his own personal history (adultery, promiscuousness, kindness?), which he would rather keep undercover?

Is it possible for a homosexual man to talk about his HIV-positive state if he actually reveals that his spouse is also contaminated with the HIV/AIDS? "It is an element of the right to personal freedom that is enforceable in some (but not all) states. These were not reportable, i.e. not of justified general use.

Luckily, major news outlets have managed to convince the judiciary that their disclosure of otherwise personal facts is proprietary because they shed the spotlight on important facets of the state of man. Cases are particularly likely to intersect writers and editors some hiding places in bankrolls that affect the privacy of notables.

However, the judiciary has also often found that even the publication of personal facts about individuals is considered reportable. And as Sonja West, a lawyer, explained in this paper titled The Story of Me, the courts' decision as to whether a publication of personal facts is "reportable" is probably misleading.

In the course of the programme, Booher announced that her late niece Anonsen, her former wife's daugther, had been forced to rape and impregnate when Anonsen was 11 years old. Before Booher's performance on the show, the police had never heard of the felony or announced the incidents to the public.

At the same time, if the testimony was correct, it ran the danger of claiming to disclose personal facts. While Anonsen and her boy confirmed that the testimony was correct, they took their mother/grandmother, Phil Donahue, and his manufacturing firm to court for publicly declaring personal facts. While Booher did not reveal her name on the show, Anonsen and her boy argue that Booher disclosed her own real name to a nationwide TV viewership, Booher unavoidably exposed the family's nightmare personal drama to anyone who knew Booher's friends.

In analysing the three aspects of the complaint under Texas legislation, the Tribunal had no difficulty in finding that the crime of incestuous acts and acts of violence are news of justifiable general interest, which the Tribunal did not necessarily mean, however, that the (albeit indirect) publication of the identity of the victim was a public interest affair.

But what's important, the courthouse justified it: Finally, the Tribunal found that: a complaint on the basis of Booher's true and blatant description of her own experiences and those of her own families is not consistent with the first proposed change, in which she set out in detail the allegedly improper reaction of her then living friend to her failure to have intercourse with him when she was afflicted with a sickness.

Though not mentioned in the script, the friend complained of invasions of his private life and argued that many folks knew he had been Kaysen's attendant and realized that Kaysen was about him. He rejected the action and found that disclosure was a question of justified general interest.

It is crucial in this case that Kaysen was not a lack adaisical third person who told Bonome's own narrative to evolve the topics in her work. Rather, she tells her own narrative, which inseparably includes Bonome.... It is in the contexts of Bonome's and Kaysen's life, which are inseparably linked by their close relationships, that the revelations must be considered in this case.

Since the First Amendment safeguards Kaysen's capacity to bring her own individual experience to the open discussion on important and lawful topics of general interest, the disclosure of Bonome's participation in these experience is a necessary incidence. When you publish a Tell-All memorandum with a large publisher or a Tell-All item with a large mag, there is a chance that somewhere on the line you will get an internal attorney to advise you on how to mitigate the risk.

Probably the biggest risk comes from blogs, Facebook posts and other on-line self-publishers who casually disclose the down-to-earth detail of their own and that of their boyfriends and boyfriends, without the advantage of counsel. And, for a blogging man (as opposed to a well-known writer like Kaysen, edited by a mighty editor like Random House), it may be far more challenging to convince a jury that the facts revealed are a real matter of state.

The last, best thing the bloggers hopes, if the judge thinks they're not, is for the judge to find, as in Anonsen and Kaysen, that an Autobiographer "has the right to reveal her own personal affairs". Keep in mind that the publication of personal facts that would be very insulting to a sensible individual to be suable.

In addition, writers often tell their writers to tell the story the truth and let internal attorneys find out how the story - or at least most of it - can be made public for safe.

Auch interessant

Mehr zum Thema