Rob wrote concerning a fictitious story based on a true story that Liesel is reportedly writing:"I don't think the judge is going to be so dumb as to not see that she is trying to slander real people through her chilling account "based on a true story".
Usually people have to pay royalties if they want to use your story. Maybe we should sue for royalties as well as lible, slander and psychological trauma"
Despite the usual lies and slander, Dave should be commended for recently warning his followers not to use arguments against critics that they were no prepared to face themselves. Here are a few examples of how the same argument might come back at you.
If people could be sued for writing fictition based on true stories, Dave could be sued for his book Cry in the Wilderness which was a thinly disguised reference to Michael and Lindy Chamberlain and the dingo attack on their daughter Azaria, in which the fictitious story suggests they were concealing a crime committed by their church, which I reckon most courts would find slanderous against both the individuals and the church they represented, particularly when she was finally vindicated as innocent.
As for paying royalties to the individuals whose stories are indirectly told; What about the seven individuals whose stories were told in the two versions of the Nullarbor walk, and the refugees whose personal stories were recounted in Worst of Woomera?
Perhaps Dave should point out to Robin that royalties are most commonly paid to the author/illustrator of works that are published, which raises the question of whether the Jesus Christians have been paying royalties to Kevin for their use of his comic illustrations and illustrated Easy English programme.
And as for "lible, slander and psychological trauma..." You should not need a lawyer to warn you of the consequences of opening the door on that line of accusation!