Da Vinci Code Author Denies New Plagiarism claim
Dan Brown was in court in New York yesterday denying claims he plagerized material from yet another author in his blockbuster bestseller. Lewis Perdue claims that Dan Brown plagerized from two of his books -- The Da Vinci Legacy and Daughter of God. Brown is also fighting charges of plagerism from authors Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh who wrote Holy Blood, Holy Grail in the 1980's which put forth theories about Jesus, Mary Magdalene and the Priory of Scion that are incorporated in The Da Vinci Code. Brown in fact lists Baigent and Leigh as sources for his book and named one of the lead charachters Leigh Teabing, a combination and anagram of both authors' surnames. That suit is still pending.
Meanwhile in Scotland, Rosslyn Chapel, scene of the book's denoument and reputed resting place of the Holy Grail, is feeling "the Da Vinci effect" with a 56 percent increase in tourism. The chapel will open now only for hourly guided tours, a move to preserve the 600 year-old structure from damage to its delicate carvings. A 3 million pound renovation of the chapel is planned to start later this year, reports the UK Herald.
Just a small comment: Brown has not sued for slander or any other form of defamation. As a former investigative reporter, I've learned to stick only to what is provably true in a court of law.
ReplyDeleteThat's why I've relied on the analysis from the Forensic Linguistics Institute. (available, along with court documents, here: http://www.davincilegacy.com/Infringement/)
John Olsson, who conducted the analysis, is the one who concluded that plagiarism existed, not me.
The sequence of events, below, is from the filing. I'm not allowed to comment on the filing, but must allow it to speak for itself.
# "57. After publication of Code, in or about the Spring of 2003, Defendant began receiving unsolicited emails and other communications from readers calling his attention to similarities between his books and Code."
# Samples of communications in paragraph 90.
# "91. The foregoing makes clear that after reading Defendant’s Works and Code, objective members of the reading public believed that Code was substantially similar to Defendant’s Works in virtually every substantive and significant way."
# "64. Thus, in response to his request for information and a person to talk to, Plaintiffs threatened Defendant with the wrath of Random House (the largest publisher in the United States) and its parent company, Bertelsmann, (the largest publisher in the world), stating clearly that Defendant would be faced with claims for substantial sums in legal fees should he seek to pursue his rights any further."
# 65. "With the threat delivered by Random House and its counsel, all communication between the parties was effectively cut off before it began."
# 66. "Thereafter, in an effort to determine, among other things, how the reading public viewed the similarities between Code, Legacy, and Daughter, Defendant created an online forum, posted the correspondence to Ms. Trager referred to above, and requested readers’ opinions and thoughts."
# 67. "At no time up to this time had Defendant publicly accused Brown of plagiarism."
# 69. "In or about December of 2003, after Defendant had provided the forensic linguist with copies of all of the books in question, the forensic linguist concluded that Brown had “no doubt” plagiarized Defendant’s Works."