Well, looks like Richard Linklater's getting some blasts from the past.

I was wondering what some of you fellow writers thought about this brief news item below, and what message it sends to friends and associates who might find fragments of themselves, or shared experiences, in a work of fiction. Should they have approval over the final draft, whether it be screenplay or novel, and if so, what level of involvement should they have? Should they have veto power over character names (or, in Linklater's case, surnames) and reactions?

I ask this because I just finished a novel in which a primary character is based on one specific person from my past, and many of the novel's events were indeed based on shit that really happened. I did go to her early on, when I was preparing the first draft, told her what I was going to do, and asked for her blessing. She was flattered but had one stipulation, which I honored, because it was important to her. Other than that, she's been very supportive. A number of the other "cast members" are composites of myself and people I've known, though some of my friends are sure to recognize specific incidents. I'd hate to imagine them at some point lashing back with lawyers demanding "creative input" or maybe nailing me with some odd classification of plagiarism charge for nabbing something from real life and setting it down on paper without their--the other "creators'"--consent.

Obviously, the DAZED AND CONFUSED incident is a matter of three people on a free-cash publicity hunt. I mean, come on--if they were REALLY suffering ridicule because of this film, wouldn't taking it public nationally make it worse? Wouldn't it draw MORE regional attention to Bob Wooderson, Andy Slater, and Richard "Pink" Floyd, who might otherwise have lived fairly humdrum lives, where they were occasionally recognized as the templates for the film? And honestly, how often does it REALLY happen to them? "Pink" Floyd I can imagine, but the others have such average surnames that even the most ardent DAZED AND CONFUSED fan might not make that connection, unless they knew the trio's Linklater connection existed in the first place. And even if THAT were the case, doesn't that connection exist primarily because Floyd, Wooderson, Slater et al, at some point in the past, capitalized on it?

Thoughts?

Classmates Sue Over 'Dazed and Confused'
The Associated Press

SANTA FE, N.M. - Three former high school classmates of "Dazed and Confused" director Richard Linklater have filed a lawsuit claiming they have suffered embarrassment and ridicule because of characters based on them in the movie.

The men--Bobby Wooderson, Andy Slater and Richard "Pink" Floyd--say Linklater did not get their permission before creating three characters in the 1993 cult classic sharing their surnames and likenesses. The suit was filed Thursday in Santa Fe against Universal Studios, which released the film.

The movie follows the drug- and alcohol-fueled hijinks of teenagers on the last day of school in May 1976. The men said the negative characterizations in the film have made their lives miserable and caused their neighbors to think poorly of them.

"We had fun in high school, but there is nothing true about that movie. Yet, I am having to deal with it all the time," said Floyd, who works at a car dealership in Huntsville, Texas, where the men went to high school.

Ernest Freeman, one of the plaintiffs' attorneys, said Slater has also had problems because people make assumptions that he takes illegal drugs.

Slater runs a construction and remodeling company and Wooderson works in the technology sector. Both men also still live in Huntsville.

Linklater's agent did not immediately return a message Saturday seeking comment.

The suit was filed in New Mexico because it has a longer statute of limitations than other states for claims of defamation and false light, attorneys said.