09 May '06 15:43>5 edits
Originally posted by NimzofishFrom the reports I’ve seen, i think the Cardinal was thinking in terms of some kind of action on the grounds of blasphemy (his concern seems to be that Christian beliefs have been ridiculed). I have absolutely no idea what his chances of success are though…
From the reports I’ve seen, i think the Cardinal was thinking in terms of some kind of action on the grounds of blasphemy (his concern seems to be that Christian beliefs have been ridiculed). I have absolutely no idea what his chances of success are though…
However, I think Opus Dei have good grounds for launching a libel action in Britain given that: ...[text shortened]... ested can find a summery of UK libel laws at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/actionnetwork/A1183394
I don't think blasphemy has been a crime or tort in the developed world for many, many years. Further, I doubt that the threat of imminent blasphemy has ever been successfully used as the basis for an injunction.
a)Dan Brown frames his novel by highlighting the ‘factual’ nature of his work and points to his meticulous research, which can reasonably be said to have led others to believe that the fictional suppositions which follow in the main part of the novel were equally factual.
The only people dense enough to have made such inferences, especially in light of the clear disclaimer on the copyright page that the entire work is a work of fiction, are people who don't believe the putatively factual assertions anyway.
b)Opus Dei is both implicitly libelled through its depiction as an organisation that would willingly engage in criminal acts and explicitly libelled through Brown’s portryal (as fact) of old, unproven, allegations of fianlcial impropriaty between the organisation and the Vatican Bank.
The novel doesn't portray anything as fact. Like all other works of fiction, it contains a clear disclaimer that its entirety is fictional, even that which appears to coincide with reality - including the self-referential claim at the novel's beginning that some of it is fact - for anybody who can't figure it out for themselves.
The massive success and publicity of the work in addition to its apparent success in shaping public opinion around Opus Dei mean the organisation should have a simple job in proving that they have been harmed by the novel.
What would be the substance of their damage?