Brown vindicated in Da Vinci Code court case

[lovuian]

http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/redir.php?jid=e6e5a5a5d727fa7d&cat=c08dd24cec417021

London - Best-selling author Dan Brown was vindicated Friday in a British court battle with two historians who accused him of plagiarising their non-fiction book to write his religious thriller The Da Vinci Code.

A judge at the High Court in London said that while Brown may have copied bits of the 1982 book The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, that did not amount to a breach of copyright.

"Even if the central themes were copied, they are too general or of too low a level of abstraction to be capable of protection by copyright," Judge Peter Smith told the court.
more...
Take that Christian Righters!!! Now lets go on with the movie!!!

[Nailzberg]

1. 30 page court opinion works out to be approx. 25 Dan Brown chapters.

(I have no idea how long the opinion was, just being silly.)

[OKDem08]

2. great book...looking forward to the movie

it's going to be interesting to see how true to the original text the movie ascribes to. I expect it to cause an uproar.:popcorn:

[donco6]

3. Have you read Angels and Demons?

That would cause an even BIGGER uproar.

[lovuian]

4. I have read Angels & Demons and look forward to the movie

and you don't think the vatican would howl if that was made into a movie...

I actually loved Angels and Demons more than the Davinci Code...

[HuckleB]

5. Ack.

Who cares. Overrated slop. And the "non-fiction" probably wasn't much better.

[lovuian]

6. Hey HuckleB just curious when you look at the Last Supper

do you see a man or a women??? sitting next to Jesus...

Now you know the Last Supper by Leonardo DaVinci
the Nonfiction painting...

[HuckleB]

10. Hey, now.

Didn't DaVinci base that painting on an old Polaroid photo? He probably couldn't tell from the photo. Niether can I.

[lovuian]

11. LOL!!! Thanks Huckle for the chuckle!!!

:rofl:

But Huckle you didn't answer the question go out on a limb here
is that a Boy you see or a girl??? in the photo

[HuckleB]

12. I'll play it safe...

and go with transvestite.

Salud!

[goforit]

24. roflmao!!!

[sweetheart]

7. Apparently healthcare keynsianism

whilst carrying a burdensome deficit has been vindicated.

What next... probably identity cards.

Gosh, i was beginning to hope millburn might be vindicated instead.

[HuffleClaw]

8. its a fine book, but i really don't get the overblown hype surrounding it

not that i'm not looking forward to the movie. tom hanks though? i'd have preferred nicholas cage.

[brentspeak]

9. In my time working at a bookstore

Last year and the year before, we constantly had trouble keeping Dan Brown books in stock. Not just "The DaVinci Code", but all his previous ones: "Angels and Demons", "Deception Point", and "Digital Fortress". Not just the paperbacks of the latter three, but also the hardcovers.

In about two years, Dan Brown probably caught up to Stephen King in the money department.

[Frank Cannon]

13. I'm looking forward to his next one...

which reportedly deals with Freemasonry mysticism in early America.

I don't care what people say about Brown or his books. They're quick-to-read brain candy and they're fun. De gustibus non est disputandum.

[JohnyCanuck]

18. Talking about Freemasonry mysticism

Check out these David Icke videos at Google video.
Freedom Road Part 1

Freedom Road Part 2

[DavidDvorkin]

14. Found guilty of ghastly writing, however.

[cliss]

15. For the record, I'm totally against Dan Brown

stealing the work of the previous authors (forgot their names) and using it in his book. At the end of the book the Da Vinci Code, there are no credits given to sources. We read this book when it first came out, and we were so intrigued by all the spectacular claims Brown made, but there was no reference material.

We thought it was strange at the time.

Now I see why.

To make matters worse, Dan Brown wins the case and is allowed to steal source materials from other authors and feel good about it in the process. This is the Literary Napster case.

[GCP]

16. I read "Holy Blood Holy Grail" about 15 years ago

I always knew he'd stolen this idea from the authors of that book. I'm sorry to see that the judge found against them, it seems plagiarism always wins nowadays. :sigh:

[dalaigh lllama]

17. I was more surprised by their lawsuit.

"Holy Blood, Holy Grail" was supposedly a nonfiction book. I read it at the time with much enjoyment but with about the same belief in its truthiness as I accord the Bible. If it's a "history", how then can it sue a fiction writer for using some of the same "historical" data? That'd be like a WWII historian suing Herman Wouk for "War and Remembrance". Besides, I'd think their book sales have probably jumped for HBHG since DaVinci Code came out, and I'm pretty sure I remember them throwing in their two cents worth on those TV specials on Decoding the DaVinci Code, so they made a little money there, too. :shrug:

[Codeine]

19. Sue him again

for crimes against literature! He's written some of the worst schlock ever slapped haphardly onto paper in years, and yet that section of folks just bright enough to read but not quite able to distinguish shit from shinola eat it up... :eyes:

[goforit]

21. Take another codeine for your pain.

[Frank Cannon]

22. De gustibus non est disputandum

Sorry you hate his books so bad. Don't read 'em.

I'll bet you complain about all the trash on TV, too.

[Codeine]

23. Not really.

I've never seen the beetle-brow set take the trash on television as seriously as they do Mr. Brown's swill. In the event that they attempt to start passing "Lost" or "Battlestar Galactica" off as representing some sort of historical fact I'll be sure to pipe up.

[VegasWolf]

20. The only real fiction is assuming that Jesus actually lived, ignoring

for even a second the mind boggling claims attributed to him, the whole pseudo history is nothing more than a con by King Constantine to lay the basis for the Catholic Church in order to create a new royal/clerical organization to control the people. Hell, Jesus wasn't even acknowledged as a son of god until the Council of Nicea some 300+ YEARS AFTER HIS SUPPOSED DEATH.