• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Dan brown being sued for the history used in the book

V

vrbaba

Diamond Member
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/27/davinci.case.reut/index.html

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- Author Dan Brown appeared in court on Monday at the start of a trial in which two historians say he copied their work to write "The Da Vinci Code" best-seller and are suing his British publisher.

Richard Leigh and Michael Baigent are suing their own publisher Random House for lifting "the whole architecture" of the research that went into their 1982 non-fiction book "The Holy Blood, and the Holy Grail," itself a bestseller.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: coomar
why have they waited this long?
Click to expand...

If they had done it while it just came out then the money wouldn't have been there. They are historians, hence they are patient.
 
Originally posted by: Ktulu
Originally posted by: coomar
why have they waited this long?
Click to expand...
profit?
Click to expand...
Duh! You ALWAYS want to wait for them to sell as many copies as possible and THEN sue. Why sue when they have barely earned anything? Then you'll get very little in your lawsuit. Looks like coomar needs to take some math classes.

 
Originally posted by: DurocShark
Originally posted by: speg
Wait a sec... he copied history? Did they want him to make up his own?
Click to expand...

No sh!t.

It's FICTION people!!! Why does everybody take the crap so seriously?!?!?!?
Click to expand...

If it's the book I'm thinking about, then he doesn't just copy history. He copies the layout of the books, the plot, the way it's written, etc... I don't know if it's the same book (pretty sure it is), but his book is pretty much a ripoff from another book. All he did was change a few names.
 
well it is kinds based on the book. i did read it and they both come to the same conclusions... but the "Holy Grail, Holy Blood" quite obviously did it first. but i agree with speg. mkae up history? he did give them credit... what more do they want? royalties?
 
i see two possible outcomes here:

(1) The suit fails because as a historians, the writers of "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" have no right to earnings on an work that cites their research.

(2) The suit succeeds because "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" has enough conjecture in it to not be considered historical research, and thus are due royalties for use of their intellectual property. However, if they win in this way, they're sabotaging thier own credibility.

I guess they just want the biggest payoff possible.
 
Originally posted by: Dragoon42
Originally posted by: DurocShark
Originally posted by: speg
Wait a sec... he copied history? Did they want him to make up his own?
Click to expand...

No sh!t.

It's FICTION people!!! Why does everybody take the crap so seriously?!?!?!?
Click to expand...

If it's the book I'm thinking about, then he doesn't just copy history. He copies the layout of the books, the plot, the way it's written, etc... I don't know if it's the same book (pretty sure it is), but his book is pretty much a ripoff from another book. All he did was change a few names.
Click to expand...

which book ARE u talking about?
its a non fiction book to a fiction book issue here...but you must be suggesting some other non fiction book which has the same story.

From the article :

Last August, Brown won a court ruling against another writer, Lewis Perdue, who claimed The Da Vinci Code copied elements of two of his novels, "Daughter of God" and "The Da Vinci Legacy."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top