Jump to content

  • Welcome to AutoLanka

    :action-smiley-028: We found you speeding on AutoLanka Forums without any registration! If you want the best experience, please sign in. Safe driving! 

Dan Brown Being Sued

sharkster

By sharkster
in OTHERS

 Share

Recommended Posts

sharkster Newbie

sharkster

Posted
Posted

topic for the day

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11589138/?GT1=7756

Authors claim ‘Da Vinci Code’ stole ideas

Lawsuit in a London court could threaten release of upcoming film

The Associated Press

Updated: 5:32 p.m. ET Feb. 27, 2006

LONDON - It’s the latest twist for the mega-selling conspiracy thriller “The Da Vinci Code”: a lawsuit against the book’s publisher for breach of copyright that could taint the novel and delay the much-anticipated movie version.

Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, authors of the 1982 nonfiction book “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail,” are suing publisher Random House, Inc. over the allegation that parts of their work formed the basis of Dan Brown’s novel, which has sold more than 40 million copies worldwide and remains high on best seller lists nearly three years after publication.

If the writers succeed in securing an injunction to bar the use of their material, they could hold up the scheduled May 19 release of “The Da Vinci Code” film, starring Tom Hanks and directed by Ron Howard.

Sony Pictures said it planned to release the film as scheduled.

“This lawsuit is not about the movie, and we are proceeding with our plans,” said Jim Kelly, senior vice president of corporate communications at Sony Pictures Entertainment.

Brown, who rarely speaks to the media, sat attentively before a judge in London’s High Court, a short walk from Temple Church — the place of worship founded by the Knights Templar — which figures in his novel. A New Hampshire native who still lives in his home state and has been working on a new novel, Brown is expected to give evidence here next week.

Brown, was “interested in taking, and took, short cuts rather than doing any of the work himself,” Jonathan Rayner James, lawyer for Baigent and Leigh, told the court.

Baigent, born in New Zealand, and Leigh, originally from the United States, are suing Random House, which also published their book. The company denies the claim and chief executive Gail Rebuck said in a statement that she believed the lawsuit was without merit.

Both books hinge on the theory that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and they had a child, and that blood line survives to this day. The earlier book set out the notion that Christ did not die on the cross but lived later in France.

James said his case was not attempting to “stultify creative endeavor,” or to claim a monopoly on ideas or historical debate, but to prove that Brown had “relied heavily” on the earlier work, published in Britain in 1982 and the following year in the United States.

Though it does not relate to theft of specific sections of text, the case involves the alleged appropriation of themes and ideas from the earlier work, James said.

Highlighted book at issue

Brown’s wife, Blythe Brown, and Ohio University librarian Stan Planton scoured religious and historical texts on Brown’s behalf as he wrote his novel, typing up notes and in some instances, copying parts of the 1982 book, James said.

The extent of “highlighted markings” in Blythe Brown’s copy of “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail” show it was not “merely consulted as an incidental reference source,” James said.

“The markings are far more extensive and detailed than in any other book,” he told the court.

Phrases used in both books to describe arguments that Jesus had been married showed similarities, James said. He told the court Brown’s work also appeared to reproduce “unusual and unlikely” connections between historical and religious figures set out in the earlier work.

“This is not an idea that I would ever have found appealing. Being raised a Christian and having sung in my Church choir for 15 years, I’m well aware that Christ’s crucifixion is the very core of the Christian faith,” Brown told reporters outside the courtroom, referring to the argument in the 1982 book that Christ had not died.

Brown has denied claims that he reproduced sections of argument from the 1982 book and said he disputes the proposition it makes that Jesus did not die on the cross.

“Suggesting a married Jesus is one thing, but questioning the Resurrection undermines the very heart of Christian belief,” Brown said in a statement released to reporters.

Jonathan Baldwin, representing Random House, said the two authors were making “wild allegations.”

“The argument is completely unsupported by any facts and some of the allegations it makes are scandalous,” Baldwin told the court.

Brown’s book also was the target of a previous lawsuit. In 2005, a U.S. judge in New York ruled that his book did not infringe on the copyrights of “Daughter of God,” by Lewis Perdue. The judge also ruled out any copyright violations of Perdue’s 1983 novel, “The Da Vinci Legacy.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watchman Newbie

Watchman

Posted
Posted

it sounds wierd to me.. you cant sue someone for publishing something thats suposed to be HISTORY.. does that mean one history book has to have a different story from another to protect it from copyright laws...

anyway, those of you who have read 'Da Vinci Code', what do you think of it? have any of you also read 'Angels and Demons'.. personally i thought that it was better than Da Vinci Code... the climax in Da Vince Code (DVC) is only reached at about 4/5ths of the way and drops like a rock.... but in Angels&Demons (A&D) you hit the climax arounf the middle of the book, and its carried ALL thje way to the end... though A&D wasnt as popular as DVC.. wonder why? everyone i have spoken to who have read both books agree with me...

and i also read Digital Fortress, but wasnt as satisfies with it as i was with the A&D or DVC...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sharkster Newbie

sharkster

Posted
  • Author
Posted

it sounds wierd to me.. you cant sue someone for publishing something thats suposed to be HISTORY.. does that mean one history book has to have a different story from another to protect it from copyright laws...

anyway, those of you who have read 'Da Vinci Code', what do you think of it? have any of you also read 'Angels and Demons'.. personally i thought that it was better than Da Vinci Code... the climax in Da Vince Code (DVC) is only reached at about 4/5ths of the way and drops like a rock.... but in Angels&Demons (A&D) you hit the climax arounf the middle of the book, and its carried ALL thje way to the end... though A&D wasnt as popular as DVC.. wonder why? everyone i have spoken to who have read both books agree with me...

and i also read Digital Fortress, but wasnt as satisfies with it as i was with the A&D or DVC...

to be honest i havent read angels n demons as yet but i knw its of freemasonry...but i feel DVC topped it cos it made ppl question christianity which is obviusly far more vastly accepted than freemasonry...jus my opinion...

as for the topic...this isnt exactly history truth be told...the authors in the 1982 book r judging history's validity n in dan brown's case, he blends sum truth wit fiction but his book is essentially a fictitious tale...

but these goons r ranting abt him using their thots to make his money...the shitty thing is he actually referrd their book or so the article says...again my opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Judy Newbie

Judy

Posted
Posted

Ur absoluetly right Dilesh....DVC was a horrible dissapointment. I expected him to fini the story with a big bang, instead of a lame ending like that....hmmmm

I personally don't mind the guy being sued for publishing such a controversial text coz it has become "THE" book that non-believers use to callenge the Bible. I already know more than 5 people who have turned skeptic after reading DVC. But then again....I like the boldness & attitude in all his books & the flow is just awsome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sharkster Newbie

sharkster

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I personally don't mind the guy being sued for publishing such a controversial text coz it has become "THE" book that non-believers use to callenge the Bible. I already know more than 5 people who have turned skeptic after reading DVC.

this comment coming frm sum1 who has a dark past herself?no comment :violent-smiley-030:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sharkster Newbie

sharkster

Posted
  • Author
Posted

would the kind gentleman and lady please be good enough to let us in on this scene?

i shall tease instead...its a very scary past n she's not into such practice anymore n its also personal so it wud b best kept buried...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sharkster Newbie

sharkster

Posted
  • Author
Posted

A nerd magnet? One who attracts nerds? What does that have to do with having books? I have books, and I am a nerd, but I'm not a nerd magnet :)

ok so wat do u attract then?besides judy :)

Nerd Magnet my TUSH !!! Chick magnet yeaaash ;)

hush hush...it happend only once

Link to comment
Share on other sites
milinda Newbie

milinda

Posted
Posted

it sounds wierd to me.. you cant sue someone for publishing something thats suposed to be HISTORY.. does that mean one history book has to have a different story from another to protect it from copyright laws...

anyway, those of you who have read 'Da Vinci Code', what do you think of it? have any of you also read 'Angels and Demons'.. personally i thought that it was better than Da Vinci Code... the climax in Da Vince Code (DVC) is only reached at about 4/5ths of the way and drops like a rock.... but in Angels&Demons (A&D) you hit the climax arounf the middle of the book, and its carried ALL thje way to the end... though A&D wasnt as popular as DVC.. wonder why? everyone i have spoken to who have read both books agree with me...

and i also read Digital Fortress, but wasnt as satisfies with it as i was with the A&D or DVC...

Dan Brown has been sued not for publishing history but for publishing facts that were established in“The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail", without doing his own research hence saving considerable time and effort. for that they are just asking couple of million pounds (I think 10) out of Dan Browns £200Mn. :)

£200 mn by writing just 4 books!!!!!!!!

Guys forget abt drug bussiness. Here is a real deal

Few hundred grands for every page you write :):P:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watchman Newbie

Watchman

Posted
Posted

Dan Brown has been sued not for publishing history but for publishing facts that were established in“The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail", without doing his own research hence saving considerable time and effort. for that they are just asking couple of million pounds (I think 10) out of Dan Browns £200Mn. :)

£200 mn by writing just 4 books!!!!!!!!

Guys forget abt drug bussiness. Here is a real deal

Few hundred grands for every page you write :):P:)

DAM! 200million pounds!!!! thats like 36 BILLION rupees!!! WWOWWWWWW!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

AutoLanka Cars For Sale

Post Your Ad Free [Click Here]



×
×
  • Create New...