Gentlemen:
This firm represents Tom Cruise. We have received information that you intend to publish a book entitled 'Open Secret: Gay Hollywood 1928-1996' by David Ehrenstein. We have been informed that the book repeats rumors that our client is homosexual and that the Church of Scientology somehow controls all aspects of his life. Each of the above statements is demonstrably false and defamatory. Mr. Cruise is not homosexual, has never had a homosexual experience, and is completely heterosexual. Moreover, the Church of Scientology does not control or direct his life.
As you well know, publishing a false and defamatory allegation under the guise that the statement was previously made is itself actionable. These false and defamatory allegations you apparently intend to publish concerning Mr. Cruise can be enormously damaging to him and I want to assure you that if you publish them, now that you have knowledge that they are false, your company and everyone involved in the publication will be sued for actual and punitive damages.
Mr. Cruise does not disapprove of people who lead a homosexual lifestyle. He believes that such a choice should be up to each individual and that each person should be respected for his or her choice. However, Mr. Cruise's livelihood depends upon his acceptance and approval by hundreds of millions of people throughout the world, the majority of whom do not share his views on this political and religious issue.
You are now on notice that the statements you apparently intend to publish are actually false and defamatory. If you nonetheless print those statements, you will be engaging in an act of completely irresponsible journalism as well as causing enormous damage to our client. If the statements are included in the book which you publish, you will immediately be served with a lawsuit.
Robert S. Chapman
Dear Mr. Chapman:
I represent William Morrow & Company, Inc., a unit of The Hearst Corporation and I write in response to your letter of August 14, 1998. While I certainly understand your concerns, I can inform you unequivocally that they are misplaced. 'Open Secret' states in no uncertain terms that Mr. Cruise is not homosexual. It also makes no claim that the Church of Scientology controls his life. The chapter devoted to Mr. Cruise is not a regurgitation of the various and widely publicized rumors that he is gay, although those rumors are alluded to in the context of the author's commentary. The chapter discussing Mr. Cruise consists of commentary and analysis on the appeal of Mr. Cruise to the heterosexual and homosexual community alike. The chapter makes the point that because of Mr. Cruise's enormous sex appeal, he is the idol of many homosexual men who fantasize about him. The book is in no way prurient or salacious; to the contrary, it is a thoughtful and well reasoned commentary on the effect of the gay community in the entertainment business.
If your concerns over the content of the book are derived from a recent story in the 'National Enquirer,' I can tell you that that story mischaracterizes the book in many respects.
We certainly appreciate your concerns and thank you for bringing them to our attention. However, for the reasons stated above, we are confident that the book in no way defames Mr. Cruise.
Debra S. Weaver
Dear Ms. Weaver:
Thank you for your letter of August 19, 1998. In order to complete our investigation of this matter and to confirm your characterization of 'Open Secret.' please send me a copy of the chapter of the book which pertains to Mr. Cruise. We will, of course, keep the chapter confidential unless it does in fact defame Mr. Cruise. In that case we will either require that the chapter be changed or, if you do not agree to the change, we will proceed with a court action.
If you have any questions, please call me.
Robert S. Chapman
Dear Mr. Chapman:
I must respectfully decline your request to allow you to review any portion of the manuscript for 'Open Secret' prior to publication. It is not William Morrows's policy, nor is there any legal obligation, to allow the subject of a book a right of review over the manuscript. That having been said, I can again assure you that William Morrow is well aware of its legal obligations and we are confident that the treatment of Mr. Cruise is in no way defamatory.
Debra S. Weaver
Dear Ms. Weaver:
I am in receipt of your letter of September 2, 1998 and I have two comments. First, I have offered to review that portion of the book which relates to Mr. Cruise in order to determine if the book is accurate. You have refused that offer. In your letter you state that there is no 'legal obligation' to allow that review. You are wrong. Since your company is now on notice that publication of the book may defame my client, your refusal to verify what the actual facts are constitutes reckless disregard for the truth. Your company has a legal obligation to determine the truth of a matter before you publish it. Your refusal to investigate the truth violates that legal obligation.
Second, no doubt you recall that when you dealt recently with my partner Charles Shephard concerning the proposed book about Godzilla, you took the same position and refused to disclose the book to him. That decision on your part resulted not only in a lawsuit but an injunction againt the publication of that book.
Since your legal position is incorrect and has resulted in unfortunate consequences in the past, I suggest you consult with your colleagues and provide me with the requested material.
Robert S. Chapman.
Dear Mr. Chapman:
The condescending tone of your letter is completely inappropriate and I will not dignify it with further response. The book has already been published and is available in book stores so the issue of pre-publication review is moot. For the record, however, your letter completely mischaracterizes my position.
It is not my position that Morrow is entitled to refute or verify facts. Rather, my position is that verification need not extend to affording the subject of a work a right to prepublication review. Moreover, you are incorrect in your claim that 'Morrow is on notice' that publication of the book may defame your client; other than the speculative falsehoods described in your letter of August 14, 1998 -- which I have already told you do not appear in the book -- we are unaware of any claim that any portion of the book contains a false and defamatory statement of fact. Finally, as I have already told you (yet you apparently have chosen to ignore) the portion of the book relating to Mr. Cruise consists primarily of commentary and opinion about the impact of Mr. Cruise on the gay community in Hollywood and the impact of celebrity upon notions of sexuality. As such, you client is not in a position to 'verify' the accuracy of that commentary.
While I do not believe that any future correspondance on this matter would be necessary or fruitful, I do request that should you need to correspond again, please limit your comments to the matter before us.
Debra S, Weaver
