The 'Da Vinci Code' Case draws to a close

[nealos101 20]

From a report by Mike-Collet-White:

A court case in which two historians accuse Dan Brown of copying their work in his novel "The Da Vinci Code" is due to finish on Monday, ending one of the most closely watched copyright claims of recent years.

Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh wrote "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail", a work of historical conjecture published in 1982, which shares some of the same themes as Brown's best-selling religious thriller.

They are suing Brown's British publisher Random House, which also happens to be their own.

Both books raise the possibility that Jesus had a child by Mary Magdalene, she fled to France after the Crucifixion and Christ's bloodline survives to this day. They also associate Magdalene with the Holy Grail.

Authors warn that should the historians succeed, there would be serious implications for fiction writers who have always incorporated other people's ideas and research into their works.

Legal experts say the claimants face an uphill task to protect general ideas.

"You would hamper artistic creativity if you couldn't write a novel that theorises about a conspiracy theory," said Boston-based intellectual property lawyer Edward Naughton of Holland & Knight.

"That's why courts have been very wary about allowing protection of ideas that are this general.

In his summing up arguments on Friday, Random House's lawyer John Baldwin emphasised that ideas of a factual nature should be available for any reader to use.

"If it were otherwise the dissemination and discussion of history, science, religion and like topics would be stultified. Creativity of novelists, TV producers and film makers would be stymied," he said.

It could take weeks for Justice Peter Smith, who presided over three weeks of hearings, to deliver judgement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, Im not a big fan of court cases or anything to do with them, but this one rocked my boat a little too much...

As you can guess by the label, I am a Published Author, and my book has not been officially released yet - and should this case end in favour of Michael Baigen & Richard Leigh I will start to worry.

But really I am interested in all of your opinions, specifically on the matter of what could happen should the two win?

[defcon pilot 0]

Those historians are whacked. I seriously hope they don't succeed. I'm pretty sure plenty of people use other's ideas in their novels. What's the problem with that?

And, on a lighter note, what's your book called?

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: nealos101

"If it were otherwise the dissemination and discussion of history, science, religion and like topics would be stultified. Creativity of novelists, TV producers and film makers would be stymied," he said.

quote>

I think that about sums up  the situation. How can you restrict someone writing a story going off on a tangent from a historical event?  its fiction, how can Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh   claim infringment if they did pretty much the same thing Mr Brown did, extrapolate on a event that may not have even happened.
Ever read The Hunt for Red October? great book , great movie, but based on a real possible situation. A what if situation if you will.
thay should  dissmiss the case.

[mayormommy 8]

I'm surprised the case made it this far, and I'd be disappointed if the plaintiffs were to prevail. The Da Vinci Code is more like a suspenseful scavenger hunt than any real depiction of historical events, totally unlike the "nonfiction" book in question. I think their case is pretty weak.

[simmax 0]

How can you claim as being yours the story of possible events that occured in the ancient world? This case is unbelievable!

[RiverCocytus 0]

Sounds just like a case of whiner-ism. Brown beat 'em to the punch. Better Luck next time, guys!

[Duke87 1,070]

Please... there is no copyright infringement here. One book is a nonfiction delving into an aternate possibilty of Christ's life. The other is a fiction novel involving origina charaters which just happen to get involved in a scenario that borrows that Idea.

If Dan Brown is guilty of Copyright infringement, so is JK Rowling....

[A Nonny Moose 8,263]

Duke87, I am with you on this. As for your Pascal joke sig, that is totally rich. It puts me in mind of "Out of the woods came the cry of the dyne-centimeter, 'Erg!'".

But seriously, folks, this is a frivilous lawsuit. Find against the plaintifs with total costs to them (not just party and party). Should be damages or contempt of court too.

[your_adress_here 11]

for those of you who don't have the book, now's the time to get it! at chapters.ca, it's only $6, which is 50% off...

[Micah 16]

Yeah, this case shouldn't have even taken place. I'm sure the 'Da Vinci Code' book will win.

[RiverCocytus 0]

While we might think this has a lot to do with 'The Da Vinci Code'-- it mostly has to do with people having a bad attitude. Hopefully free speech and reason will win over socialistic and totalitarian ideas about intellectual property. Unless they can PROVE Dan stole their work, directly from their book, they don't even have a case! The shame is that this even got in court. How muddle-headed.