Can Fábula and Netflix produce it without the family’s authorization?

by times news cr

The relatives of Jorge Matute Johns demand the cancellation of the production, and a ⁤lawyer detailed to EL ‌DÍNAMO what the legal panorama‌ is like.

The family of Jorge Matute Johns the young man who disappeared in 1999​ and⁣ was found dead in 2004, went⁣ to the National Congress to ‌demand ⁣the ‌arrest ​of a series produced by‌ Netflix and Fable that tells‌ his story.

The production,‍ which will present details about the disappearance and death of Matute Johns, has generated strong rejection from his relatives.

Alex Matute, Jorge’s brother,⁢ spoke out ​against the project during his speech before the Culture Commission of the Chamber of ‌Deputies demanding that his⁣ brother’s memory be respected.

“Let them ⁢do what they want, a work inspired by the‍ facts, change some‍ details and use other names.‍ But ​they cannot use the name of Jorge Matute Johns, neither my mother’s ⁣nor ‌mine,” he stated.

For its part, ​ Maria‌ Teresa Johns the young man’s mother,⁣ maintained that she did not authorize the use of her⁣ son’s ‌story in the series, and was visibly affected. “I want to stop this series, stop it from continuing,” the woman ‍stated.

“I have said it ‌in every‌ way possible, but it hurt me deeply.” “This has made me go backwards, I cannot move forward,” he​ stated, asking⁤ that the project be cancelled.

Can‍ Fábula ⁢and Netflix ‍produce‍ the Matute Johns series⁣ without the family’s authorization?

Regarding family rights,‍ Matías Rojo Picand, lawyer specialized in technological law, ⁢personal data protection and cybersecurity, revealed to THE DYNAMO that the family of Jorge Matute Johns does have legal tools⁤ to⁤ defend themselves.

According to the expert, the most logical​ thing “is⁣ for Jorge Matute’s family to⁤ file an appeal for ⁣protection before the Illustrious Court of Appeals, for violation of the right to honor and image, in accordance with article 19 No.‌ 4 of⁢ the Constitution.” .

To⁢ this,⁣ Rojo added that the “image right is implicitly recognized in‌ the Constitution.”

Currently, the Privacy Protection Law ​ It does not specifically address the protection of data of deceased persons. However, the ⁣amending project of this‍ law, in its article 4 on the​ “Rights of⁤ the Data Owner”, establishes the following: “In the event​ of⁢ the death of​ the data owner, ‌the rights recognized by this law⁣ can be ‌exercised by his‍ or⁣ her heirs.”

In ‌this ‌way, the family of Jorge Matute Johns could exercise ‌their rights,‌ and wait for a resolution in ⁢this ⁢regard, supported by both⁢ the article 19 No. 4 of the Constitution, that ⁢protects the right to⁤ honor and image, as by ‍the future amending article mentioned above.

If ⁤so, Netflix and Fable They⁤ could go ahead with a⁢ work inspired ⁤by⁢ the facts, but modifying certain details and using fictitious names ⁢to avoid the direct use of the real names of the protagonists.

However, what will happen to⁤ the series ‌still remains to be resolved, and⁣ we will have to wait for the outcome of the‍ legal appeals​ that the family may present to​ defend their rights.

How can emotional distress impact legal ‍claims against media‌ companies ‍using real-life stories without consent?

Interview with Matías Rojo⁣ Picand: Legal Perspective on the Netflix Series About Jorge‌ Matute Johns

Editor (Time.news): Welcome, Matías. Thank you for joining us today. As you know, the family of Jorge Matute Johns is currently fighting against a Netflix series that tells the story of his tragic⁤ disappearance and death. They claim they haven’t authorized the use of their loved one’s name or ⁣story. What is the legal standing‌ for families in these situations?

Matías Rojo​ Picand: Thank you for having‌ me. The situation surrounding the Matute Johns family ⁤is ‍complex, but there are legal avenues available to ⁢them. Families ‌can indeed protect their rights related to the use of personal stories, particularly when it involves sensitive ‌subjects like loss and tragedy.

Editor: What specific legal measures can the Matute Johns family pursue against this ‍production?

Matías: The most logical step would be for them to file an appeal‍ for protection before the Illustrious Court of Appeals. This legal action could serve to halt the production, especially if they can argue that the series infringes on their personal rights and the memory of Jorge.

Editor: It’s clear that the emotional impact on ⁤the family is considerable. Alex Matute⁢ has expressed that while the production can‌ change details, using his brother’s⁢ name is off-limits. How does emotional distress factor into​ legal claims⁤ like ​this?

Matías: Emotional ⁣distress is a significant‍ consideration in legal cases ⁢involving personal stories. In many jurisdictions, families ‌have the right to claim damages if they can demonstrate that the ‌use of their loved⁣ one’s story in a ‍public context‍ causes suffering or damages their dignity. The family’s objection is not just‌ about the​ name; it’s about respect for their loved one’s memory.

Editor: Maria Teresa Johns has also voiced her distress, saying that the project has affected her deeply.‍ How can the legal system address her concerns?

Matías: ⁤ Her testimony is ‍crucial. If ⁢the family​ can present clear evidence of the emotional turmoil caused by the series, it strengthens ‍their case ​in court. The‌ legal system often considers the personal impact on families in⁤ these matters. In this case, the court may find grounds to issue an injunction or ultimately rule in favor of the family.

Editor: You mentioned the importance of ⁢family rights. Are ⁣there ‍precedents in⁤ which families have successfully challenged‌ similar productions?

Matías: Yes, there are precedents. Courts have historically ruled in ​favor of families when productions have​ used personal stories without⁢ consent, especially⁢ when those stories entail traumatic events. For example, there have been cases where family members were able to stop documentaries or films that they felt were exploitative or disrespectful.

Editor: Given ‌this context, where do you believe the responsibility lies for productions like the one by Netflix? Should there‌ be⁤ stricter regulations regarding how real-life stories are presented?

Matías: ​ That’s ⁤a thoughtful question. While artistic freedom is important, it should​ not come at the expense of others’ dignity and rights. Stricter regulations may not be necessary, but there should be ‌clear guidelines for productions to seek consent and respect family wishes, especially in sensitive matters. A better ⁢balance needs to be struck between storytelling and⁤ ethical considerations.

Editor: Thank you, Matías, for providing such⁢ valuable insights into this pressing issue. Your​ expertise in this field helps‌ shed light on the family’s‌ plight and the importance of respecting personal narratives.

Matías: Thank you for discussing this vital topic. It’s essential that we continue to advocate⁤ for the rights of families as they navigate‍ these difficult​ situations.

You may also like

Leave a Comment