How does changing a name protect against a libel suit when &quot;everyone&quot; knows who he is?
<p>In the movie, "Moneyball," the name of Billy Beane's assistant was fictionalized to "Peter Brand." Yet anyone who has read Michael Lewis' book knows that his real name was Paul dePodesta.</p>

<p>Mr. dePodesta withheld permission to use his real name because of several "shortcuts" the movie played with the facts, like the part about dropping in on a newly eligible player on Christmas Day. By doing so, he apparently "disassociated" himself from the movie.</p>

<p>Given that the movie was "based on a true story," what does changing Paul dePodesta's name do? In the Sound of Music, which was "based on a true story," the Captain and Maria retained their real names and identities, but the seven children were fictionalized. Why might that be?</p>

<p>By changing the name, the filmmakers are signaling that the character in the movie is not acting the way the real-life person acted.</p>

<p>It is not uncommon for historical fiction--which is basically what the "Moneyball" film is--to combine historical characters for narrative purposes, or to invent new characters to drive the plot. If you see a movie where Henry V stops to talk to Joe Welshman, a common soldier, before a battle, you assume that Henry V was at that battle, but you don't assume that the soldier is a historical person whose words with the king happened to be recorded on a nearby tape recorder.</p>

<p>So, if you watch a movie where some characters have real people's names, like Billy Beane, and others have invented names, like Peter Brand, you don't necessarily assume that Brand represents a one-to-one correspondence with one real person. More likely, his part represents things that were done by multiple people, or were done in a different way that is not as narratively convenient.</p>

<p>As you say, if you read the book, you will recognize the character--but you will also recognize the changes, and understand why the name was changed.</p>

libel