Podcasts
Does Uggie the Dog Ever Have to Work Again?
- And other great mysteries of Hollywood, beheaded for your pleasure in our weekly podcast!
Does Jim Carrey's Daughter Have an Edge on Idol?
- And other great mysteries of Hollywood, beheaded for your pleasure in our weekly podcast!
Could Brad Pitt Wear Jeans and a T-shirt to the Oscars?
- And other great mysteries of Hollywood, beheaded for your pleasure in our weekly podcast!
What's All This About a Kate Gosselin Cruise?
- And other great mysteries of Hollywood, beheaded for your pleasure in our weekly podcast!
Ask A Question
Could Dirty Details of My Sex Life End Up on CSI?
CBS
The CSI creators are being sued by two people who were used as models for characters on a episode. Aren't these kinds of shows "ripped from the headlines" all the time?
—Alicia, via the Answer B!tch inbox
Of course! That episode where a guy feeds his victims to pigs? Based on a guy who made big news for feeding his victims to pigs. Pigs nomming on human remains: That is so a job for the rock 'n' roll forensics team.
But the lawsuit you mention is quite different. A real-life realtor couple claims they were used as inspiration for a CSI plotline. The episode "Deep Fried & Minty Fresh" deals with a realtor couple involved with alcoholism, murder and kinky sex, which might be fine, if...
...these people were either famous, or in the news for having done such things. They're neither.
Nonetheless, the lawsuit says the script writer used the realtors' real names in early drafts. Those real names, Melinda and Scott Tamkin, made their way to spoiler sites on the Web, and a lawsuit was born. Specifically, per the complaint, the couple seeks more than $3 million in damages from CBS, Jerry Bruckheimer's production company and others involved with the show. (Bruckheimer's attorneys declined comment for this story.)
"This isn't just about a claim for monetary damages," the Tamkins' attorney, Anthony Glassman, tells me. "Imagine if you wake up one day and realize your world has been turned upside down, and you've done nothing to invite this."
Usually, Hollywood has quite a bit of leeway in adapting news to prime-time TV drama. If a subject is clearly newsworthy—like the guy who let his pigs eat people or the guy who got rescued from pirates—then, in general, producers and screenwriters can have at it.
But when the subject of a TV episode or movie is truly a private person, the rules change. Producers must seek permission from a subject before proceeding. And that is what makes this case a case, I am told.
"There are two parts to this suit, one of which is a right to privacy—that basically, these are just two people selling real estate and trying to make a living and who don't want to be in the spotlight like that," entertainment attorney Christopher J. Cabott tells me.
The other factor is defamation—accusing someone of spreading malicious and false things about someone, to the victim's detriment.
I'm sure that Lawrence Fishburne would have some sort of witty quip to add at this point, but until I'm paid his per-episode fee, you'll get this sentence instead.
______
Ripped from the Twitter! @answerbitch
8 Comments
-
Show the next 1 - 0 of 8 comments
Now loading...