Stoner Uprising

The impending court battle of Wooderson et al. v. Universal Studios Inc. et al. has once again raised that Kaufman-esque dilemma: what creative control do we have over our own lives?

The case can be summed up as such: the real-life inspirations for Dazed and Confused's Wooderson, Slater and "Pink" Floyd are suing Richard Linklater for using their names and pharmacological experiences circa 1976. It should be made clear that they are not denying the accuracy of Linklater's representation, nor are they suing for libel (considering that Floyd admits to "paddling" a young Linklater, there is a plausible motive for directorial revenge). In fact, they seem to think it's a little funny, when they're not getting self-righteous about autograph seekers and unwanted fame.

This case does have significant ramifications for creative self-expression. If Orson Welles had been barred from pillaging the life of William Randolph Hearst, would we have Citizen Kane? If Toulouse-Lautrec's life was not open to looting by Tolkein, would we have Lord of the Rings? This case is especially relevant in the new era of confessional memoir/fiction in which we live.

In a side note, if anyone is thinking of using details from my life in a semi-fictional setting, I'd like my character to be 6'2'' and capable of dunking a basketball.