LONDON - "The Da Vinci Code" author Dan Brown was accused in Britain's High Court on Monday of taking material for his blockbuster conspiracy thriller from a 1982 book about the Holy Grail.
The accusation was made in a breach of copyright lawsuit filed against "The Da Vinci Code" publisher Random House. If the lawsuit succeeds in getting an injunction barring use of the disputed material, the scheduled May 19 release of "The Da Vinci Code" film starring Tom Hanks and Ian McKellan could be threatened.
Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, authors of "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail," sued Random House, which also published their book. Random House denies the claim.
Baigent and Leigh claim Brown appropriated their ideas and themes in writing his book, which has sold more than 25 million copies worldwide since its 2003 publication.
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.
Brown, who was expected to testify next week, told reporters outside court that this idea had no appeal for him.
"Suggesting a married Jesus is one thing, but questioning the Resurrection undermines the very heart of Christian belief," said Brown, who described himself as a committed Christian.
Jonathan Rayner James, a lawyer for Baigent and Leigh, said the case did not relate to the theft of specific parts of text but to the appropriation of themes and ideas.
"Brown copied from 'The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail' and therefore the publication of the resulting novel is an infringement of my clients' copyright," he told the court.
James said his case was not an attempt to "stultify creative endeavor" or claim a monopoly on ideas or historical debate.
But Jonathan Baldwin, representing Random House, said Baigent and Leigh were making "wild allegations."
He said they were suggesting that "Mr. Brown has appropriated not only the numerous parts of a jigsaw puzzle but the organizational way (Baigent and Leigh) put it together."
"In brief, the complaint appears to be that 'The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail' discloses the idea that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, that they had children which survived and married into a line of French kings, that the lineage continues today, and that there is a secret society based in France which has the objective of restoring this lineage to the thrones not only of France but to the thrones of other European nations as well, and that ('The Da Vinci Code') uses some of this idea," Baldwin said.
He said Brown referred to "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" in his novel, but the earlier book "did not have anything like the importance to Mr. Brown which the claimants contend it had."
The case is being heard in the Royal Courts of Justice on The Strand, a short walk from the Temple Church, which figures in Brown's book. The church, founded by the Knights Templars, has reported an increase in visitor traffic inspired by "The Da Vinci Code."
Brown's book also was the target of a previous U.S. 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."
I just caught the end of a report on this story. there was some media lawer who said that Brown would most likely win. It has something to do with the fact that Jesus & Mary Magdaline story was a well known and respected theory and you cannot claim copyright on a theory.
I read that too and I laughed when I read that one of the main characters, Leigh Teabing was an anagram of the two author's names:
Leigh (duh) and Baigent. hahaha, nice.
Does that mean that anyone that writes about anything that's been written before will get sued? So let's see, anyone that writes about babysitters will have to be sued by Ann M. Martin who wrote BabySitters Club books. Anyone who writes about frankenstein will get sued by someone representing Shelley, anyone that writes about Jesus in general will be sued by the bible writers....
"I'm looking for love. Real love. Ridiculous, inconvenient, consuming, can't-live-without-each-other love." - Carrie Bradshaw
"The danger of an adventure is worth a thousand days of ease and comfort" - Paulo Coehlo
Live your life like it's your last day on earth
Life is not how many breaths you take, but how many moments take your breath away.
The da Vinci Code is a fictional account of this fictional work: Holy Blood Holy Grail.
The idea that the Illuminati and the Vatican are at odds with each other are as fictional as da Vinci's conclusion and also as fictional as Holy Blood Holy Grail.
This is hylarious that they are suing Dan Brown.
After all the writers of Holy Blood Holy Grailswear it's the truth....HAHAHA!!
So, how can anyone sue someone for fictionalizing a true account.
Comedy and I mean comedy and irony at its best.
And I think they should sue my ancestors for believing this crap!!! HAHAHAHA!!!!
If they won that court case, they'd win a whooooollllleee lot more than they would suing Dan Brown!!!
Bloody HAHAHAHAHA!!!
Maybe they need to sue Nikos Kazantzakis, Paul Schrader, and Martin Scorsese for that suck and I mean suck movie 'The Last Temptation of Christ'
Why not? It's the same bullcrap story!!
God certainly has a sense of humour!
I bet he's up there laughing at all these idiots running 'round with their heads cut off!
02-27-2006 05:32 PM
