It will be interesting to see whether the case has a different outcome than the sequel to “Gone with the Wind” written from a so-called “black” or slave perspective called “The Wind Done Gone.” The difference, of course, is that GWTW was politically incorrect and the slave perspective was culturally necessary.
In that case the court reached the bizarre holding that the unauthorized sequel was satire and should be permitted to be published over the objections of the author’s estate.
The New York Times heavily promoted the unauthorized GWTW sequel through multiple articles. However, very few copies were sold nonetheless, if memory serves me correctly.
That should be, “culturally ‘necessary’,” with scare quotes.