Brown's `Da Vinci Code' Challenged Weeks Before Tom Hanks Film

[shugah]

Brown's `Da Vinci Code' Challenged Weeks Before Tom Hanks Film

Feb. 27 (Bloomberg) -- Two writers are suing the publishers of Dan Brown's best-selling ``The Da Vinci Code'' for allegedly stealing their ideas, weeks before the planned release of a film version starring Tom Hanks.

Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, co-authors of the non- fiction ``Holy Blood, Holy Grail,'' claim that the storyline of Brown's thriller, that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene and fathered a child, was lifted from their book, published more than 20 years earlier.

If successful, the two authors could seek an order blocking further infringement of their copyright, which would affect sales of ``The Da Vinci Code'' in the U.K. as well as the British distribution of Columbia Pictures' movie adaptation, copyright law experts said. The novel has sold about 40 million copies globally since its publication in 2003.

``It's a hugely important case, in part because it relates to the world's best-selling book, but also because of the principle of law involved,'' Paul Sutton, a lawyer representing Baigent and Leigh, said in an interview Feb. 24.

Hearings in the case begin today. The film, directed by Ron Howard, is scheduled to open in the U.K. on May 19 after premiering at the Cannes Film Festival in southern France.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000101&sid=a2A4V5sN1JdI&refer=japan

[DoYouEverWonder]

1. They've got to be kidding?

Or do they just want more publicity for their own book, which most people would have never heard of if it wasn't for the Da Vinci Code?

[melody]

4. To be fair, it was a best seller at its time, but...

They borrowed far more from other writers (none of whom sued them) than Brown borrowed from them, and he credited Baigent and Leigh -- they credited few of the people they "researched".

[DoYouEverWonder]

7. Maybe Mary Magellan

should sue them all, since the speculation about her was revived with the discovery of the Gospel of Mary.

[LostinVA]

21. Was she related to the explorer?

[DoYouEverWonder]

24. Oops, Magdalene

If only I could spell.

[LostinVA]

25. giggle

[schmuls]

18. Yes, I'm thinking of the fasinating book, I think it is called the "Hidden

Bloodline of Jesus Christ", can't remember the author, but he says he is the official genealogist of Scotland. It was written, I believe, many years before any of these books, and gives the same premises, but probably more and beautifully illustrated. I thought when I read Da Vinci code for references, there were no credits listed in the back; am I mistaken?

[Frank Cannon]

33. The "credits" are actually part of the story

The protagonists are in a library looking at several books, specifically named by title and author, which are all pertinent to the subject they are researching. "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" is one of them.

[melody]

42. Laurence Gardner, et al

Yes, that was Laurence Gardner. His work is factual and admirably clear of hyperbole for this kind of work. I liked "Holy Blood, Holy Grail", but they're really off the wall with this.

Even before Laurence Gardner, non-fiction mystery writers have written about this stuff for years. Only Baigent and Leigh seem to think they personally cooked up the concept.

I'm amazed at the way this book is being attacked as if it was factual. Is there some real resistance to wild theories in fiction?

The "credit" is in the text of the book. Also, Brown has mentioned it in interviews. It's not an idea that originated with Baigent and Leigh by any means.

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. I hope that was before he started babbling about antigravity

and "negative energy density and the ability to manipulate space-time". http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/LaurenceGardner.html

[melody]

47. Muriel, what has one to do with the other?

I recommend you look at the whole history of "wild conjecture". As long as you context your theories that they are "wild", one is still allowed to hypothesize -- even very unlikely things. We're not required to color inside the lines by law -- at least, not yet.

Anyway, I've never read any of Gardner's work on anti-gravity, I'm talking about his Grail-related theories.

[muriel_volestrangler]

50. I'm pointing out that he has been known to talk absolute bollocks

and so I'm hoping that he has some evidence for his Grail theory, rather than pulling it out of his arse like the antigravity.

[melody]

52. speculation is not bollocks

You may disagree with his assertions -- I may disagree with his assertions -- but that doesn't make it "pulling it out of his arse".
He's just disagreeing with interpretations of localized evidence. Happens all the times in theorizing.

[Scairp]

54. Exactly

The theory that Mary Magdalene was married to Jesus of Nazareth has existed since the beginnings of Christianity. Sounds like sour grapes on their part, and they just want the money. I don't know how they think they are going to stop a movie starring Tom Hanks and directed by Ron Howard, two of the most powerful guys in Hollywood. Not gonna happen in this lifetime.

[NashVegas]

64. nevermind

already been answered.

[LizW]

6. Bingo. Publicity.

Holy Blood, Holy Grail was quite entertaining and thought provoking, but they sold it as non-fiction. Too bad for them that Dan Brown took the idea and made gazillions with it.

But all's well for everyone. Tons of people are reading Holy Blood, Holy grail who wouldn't have if Brown hadn't made the story famous. I'm sure Dan Brown and Ron Howard are crying all the way to the courtroom.

No publicity is bad publicity.

[Javaman]

41. Usually, when writers claim plagiarism, they do it, AFTER the movie

is a hit.

I don't really see the logic behind these guys coming out now.

they should wait until the movie is a mega hit (which no doubt it probably will be) then go in and have the law suit.

that way, they can lay claim to the majority of the profits.

If they settle now, they may only get a small portion.

It's kinda like rule number #1 of how to sue for plagiarism.

but like many things in Hollywood, they rules are never hard and fast and change with the height of the hem line.

[NashVegas]

66. Today Was the First Day of the Trial

Which means the suit was filed sometime well before this.

Who's to say the studio isn't the one taking advantage of the timing?

[Javaman]

76. Very good point. nt

[JNelson6563]

19. I dunno

I read it a few years ago and while reading the DaVinci code I was often reminded of Holy Blood, Holy Grail. Very much alike in many parts.

Julie

[HeeBGBz]

73. Why didn't they sue earlier?

They wanted to wait for the movie? Either its PTB wanting to squelch the movie's release or the HBHG guys just want to capitolize on the Da Vinci Code hoopla.

[ET Awful]

2. Good luck with that guys . . . . considering he actually credits that book

in "The Da Vinci Code".

You can't sue someone for writing a fictional story based on non-fiction accounts. If you could, a huge number of fiction authors would be out of jobs.

For that matter, all those "based on a true story" movies would be sued into submission as well.

[northzax]

32. ding ding ding

the only way to do this is to claim that your original book is, in fact, fiction.

[Lorien]

49. Yep; he mentions both the title and the authors in the story

I'm familiar with "Holy Blood, Holy Grail", and it's no suspense thriller. More the lines of "The Hiram Key". The lawsuit must be nothing more than an attempt to get in on the potential book sale revenue associated with the film's opening.

[donco6]

67. Yes.

The Merovingian story is ancient and well-documented. How can you sue someone for basing a novel on it?

[jayctravis]

68. True.

Although the story I saw on the news about this caught that one of the characters in DaVinci Code is an anagram of HB,HG author's names.

[melody]

3. Stealing THEIR ideas????

Baigent and Leigh "researched" the work of dozens of writers in writing their book.

This is to say nothing of all the other writers who've been "researched" by Brown.

Steal from one writer, it's plagiarism. Steal from several, it's research.

[kestrel91316]

27. Brown's book is not a work of researched nonfiction...................

it's a NOVEL. It's fiction, fantasy, speculation.

I just finished reading Holy Blood, Holy Grail (because of DaVinci Code!) and it's a great book, very well-researched NONFICTION.

This case is going to be thrown out so fast those guys heads will spin. Writing fiction about a factual historical event is not plagiarism.........

ARGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

(not ranting at you - ranting at this whole thing)

[melody]

40. Yeah, no one yells about there being no Jerusalem's Lot in Maine

And I feel certain Stephen King has yet to be sued by the city of Israel. :)

[bleedingheart]

5. Having read both books, I think they have no case

The DaVinci code is a thriller that is based around the premise that the bad guys want to discover the secret of the "grail"...

The book Holy Blood Holy Grail...is a more like reading a history textbook if I recall ( I don't have it in my bookcases anymore) and while it is very interesting and a good read it isn't the same kind of book.

Now I know that when I was reading the Da Vinci code the book Holy Blood Holy Grail was referenced as were other books....

I think this is a PR stunt to get their book back on the charts again...

[Minnesota Libra]

8. I smell someone who smells a royalty check.........

...... and obviously some lawyer convinced them they can get it too. At least the lawyer will make money either way. :popcorn:

[Che_Nuevara]

9. Some of the Gnostics in the 3rd century BCE

believed that Jesus and Mary Magdeline had children.

I hope they get laughed out of court.

[Richard Steele]

22. Bingo! This idea/belief has existed for many centuries.

Someone, somewhere, probably believed it a week after Jesus died.

These two can't really claim that they invented this idea.

[waiting for hope]

10. Purely a stunt...

for the authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail appeared on at least two of the shows that explored the Da Vinci code - one on National Geographic and the other on the History Channel. Greed, lovable greed.

[Copperred]

11. Sorry no one is kidding...

A simple read shows that Mr. Brown is certainly a theif.

He should pay up...and give due to what is NOT his.

Whether what he did is illegal I know not, but I know his ideas certainly came from HBHG.

[robcon]

12. I think your certainty is misplaced.

When you write "I know his ideas certainly came from HBHG" I think you've overstepped from what you think you know, to saying that you KNOW it.

[Copperred]

23. KNOW

Have you read HBHG? I do not know the legalities of it..it may be he did not steal according to the legal litmus test, but I have no doubt he lifted his knernel from them.

[Frank Cannon]

35. The guys that wrote HBHG "stole" from CENTURIES of...

speculation, from a legion of writers throughout history. Who's going to sue them? It's research, for crying out loud.

And how do you claim intellectual property on something that you are proclaiming is a historical fact? It would be like me writing a book about how Thomas Jefferson had a relationship with the slave Sally Hemings (something that many historians already consider to be a historical fact), then trying to sue somebody when they create a fictional treatment about Jefferson's relationship with Sally Hemings.

[Orangepeel]

36. HBHG was sold as nonfiction.

David McCullough, for example, recently wrote a book about John Adams. Does that mean nobody else can write a book about John Adams? Even if it is a story about some professor tracking down John Adam's ghost while some religious freak wants to kill him?

[melody]

46. I've read it and many books like it

I'm interest in the Knights Templar period. It's no more revolutionary in its assertions than other books have been. Robert Anton Wilson, for one, has been writing on related topics for forty years.

They are overreaching by a mile, perhaps because of their dislike of the author for some reason or simply wanting publicity for their own work. For whatever reason, it's despicable.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

13. it is not a crime if your ideas for a fictional novel come from a factual

one, or one purported to be factual. If you provide attribution, you are free.

They have a loser of a case. I agree that this it merely a publicity stunt.

[melody]

43. This idea has been around forever

Baigent and Leigh no more "discovered" this than all the writers they researched.

In fact, it's a central belief in some off-shoots of secret societies.

I don't care where he got the idea from, historical facts/theories are open to all to read and write about. Baigent and Leigh are "thieves" if Brown is one.

[ET Awful]

51. And their ideas came from ideas put forth a century before.

That doesn't make the theory or legend theirs anymore than writing a history of the Arthurian legends makes the author the sole owner of any future fictional accounts of King Arthur.

If I had written a history of the Arthurian legends in 1915, does that mean I could sue T.H. White for writing "The Once and Future King"?

[Ursus Rex]

58. Only if your heirs dig you up.

Thomas Malory let it slide, eh?

[truthisfreedom]

14. it seems ridiculous to me that a fiction book could possibly "steal" from

a non-fiction book. call me crazy, but every damned fiction book on earth has something in it that first appeared in a non-fiction book.

[Stockholm]

15. You just can´t buy advertising like this!

It´s Brokeback Mountain all over.

[Robeson]

16. "non-fiction"? Wow, the bounds of non-fiction are really being....

...stretched now-a-days.

[Robb]

17. No kidding

I can see their argument now:

"Well, your honor, we've decided to cop to having made a bunch of crap up, so we're really holding a work of fiction. So's this new book, so they stole our idea!" :D

[kestrel91316]

28. HBHG most certainly IS nonfiction. Have you read it?

Have you seen the citations and bibliography in the back?

DaVinci Code is fiction - though some folks like the Catholic Church seem to have overlooked that minor fact in their fussing over it.

[muriel_volestrangler]

30. Ha ha, it's all based on admitted forgeries

The authors of the Holy Blood, Holy Grail book don't care, of course, because they still make money from it. Now they're just getting greedy.

In the 1960s, the mystery took a weirder turn. An unknown person deposited a collection of documents in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris. These documents, called the "Dossiers Secrets," included a genealogy of Merovingian royalty, documents claiming to tell Sauniere's story in great detail, and supposed reproductions of Sauniere's mysterious documents, as well as letters, magazine articles, and a very unusual poem. These papers, many in code, appear to point to a bloodline of French royalty, supposedly descendents of Christ, and their protectors, the mysterious Priory of Sion, whose Grand Masters, according to the documents, include such literary and artistic luminaries as Leonardo Da Vinci, .

Most of these documents are forgeries, or altered. Some, however, point to some kind of inside knowledge of the activities of Sauniere, and their careful crafting leads to another mystery- why would anyone go through so much trouble?

The Prieure de Sion is (or was) a real organization. It was founded in 1070 and folded into the Knights Templar (Order of the Temple) about thirty years later. They appear to have been formally seperated from the Order of the Temple about a hundred years later, and have surfaced on occasion over the years in connection with various political movements. The true purpose (or even the continued existence) of the Priory is unknown, although they have been linked to the seventeenth century Rosicrucian brotherhood..

According to the "Dossiers Secrets," past Masters of the Priory range from Templar Martyr Jaques DeMolay to Leonardo Da Vinci, and finally, Pierre Plantard, a figure who figures prominently in the book "Holy Blood, Holy Grail." In the seventies, an associate of Pierre Plantard, the so-called Grand Master of the Priory, admitted to aiding Plantard in creating the Dossiers Secret. Many of the claims in the documents, including Plantard's supposed Merovingian ancestry, have been proven fraudulent, yet no real motive for a hoax of such great magnitude has yet been discovered.

http://altreligion.about.com/library/bl_rennes.htm

See also eg http://priory-of-sion.com/psp/id181.html

[apnu]

37. Be that as it may...

... HBHG has always been published as non-fiction. It may be total bullshit (although the thought that Jesus didn't get busy some time in his life is more unbelievable than HBHG) but its non-fiction (possible) bullshit.

So the case that plagiarism is involved is far fetched. And further reaching because Da Vinci Code cites HBHG as a source. So the authors got the credit they are claiming.

What a bunch of morons.

[kestrel91316]

39. Based on forgeries or not, a purported work of nonfiction

does not become a work of fiction merely because its factual basis is questioned. I don't know that every supposed fact in HBHG has been proven false by any means. SOME of its source material is questionable.

I still find it a fascinating, plausible premise. More plausible than virgin births and resurrections from death.............

[muriel_volestrangler]

44. 'Plausible' does not mean 'historical'

You can come up with loads of plausible stories, but without any evidence for them. More plausible is, say, that Jesus and Mary Magdelene had 2 children who stayed in Judea, and were then both killed during the revolt against Roman rule without having any children of their own. I just made that up, but it's better than having them flee to Gaul and somehow their few descendants becoming kings a few hundred years later.

[Solon]

56. I would say that the most we can speculate on is that they were lovers...

1) But they were grieved. They wept greatly, saying, How shall we go to the Gentiles and preach the gospel of the Kingdom of the Son of Man? If they did not spare Him, how will they spare us?

2) Then Mary stood up, greeted them all, and said to her brethren, Do not weep and do not grieve nor be irresolute, for His grace will be entirely with you and will protect you.

3) But rather, let us praise His greatness, for He has prepared us and made us into Men.

4) When Mary said this, she turned their hearts to the Good, and they began to discuss the words of the Savior.

5) Peter said to Mary, Sister we know that the Savior loved you more than the rest of woman.

6) Tell us the words of the Savior which you remember which you know, but we do not, nor have we heard them.

Chapter 5, The Gospel According to Mary(Magdalene)

This Gospel was acquired in 1896 in Cairo by a German Scholar, but due to war and other considerations, it wasn't published until 1955. In addition, it was not alone, the Apocryphon of John and the Sophia of Jesus Christ were the other texts that it was found with. These other two texts were also found independently in the Nag Hammadi discovery.

Two things stand out here, first, that Jesus had Disciples that were of both Men and Women, Mary Magdalene being his most beloved among them, and also that they WERE disciples, as the use of Sister would imply.

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

57. cool quote--do you have a LINK?----thanks/ n/t

[Solon]

63. Here you go...

http://altreligion.about.com/od/gnosticscriptures1/

[lovuian]

61. Well since they didn't have birth control in those days ... if they

were lovers they had children...

[melody]

48. not all

It's not "all" based on the Sauniere theory. Baigent and Leigh's theory are heavily drawn from it, but this idea has bounced around the pointy heads of the ruling elite for generations.

[Bridget Burke]

20. Big Surprise! "The Idiots Guide to Holy Blood Holy Grail" sold better....

Than the fascinating mixture of history & fantasy that preceded it. Too many long words! Too many pages! Those mysterious hints & "could it be true?" questions go right over the head of far too many readers. You known them--those dread Readers Who Read One Book Per Year--& insist on retelling every plot point, every time they get a chance.

Perhaps this suit will attract some of the Da Vinci fans who want to go deeper. There is a lot of interesting history in HBHG, even if some of it is not true. Jump down the HBHG rabbit hole & begin your investigation into some of the more intriguing bits of our past.

[bleedingheart]

26. you hit the nail right on the head....

HBHG was more academic and actually had more content per page than most people are used to getting...and it did require some thinking....


I just recently finished reading a book about Nell Gwynn written by one of her descendents...it was purely an academic read not an entertainment type read...

[schmuls]

29. What is the name of the book? I'm a big historical biography fan!

[bleedingheart]

38. Nell Gywn

is the name of the book and it was written by her descendent... Charles Beauclerk

[zara]

31. No copyrights in ideas.

Of course there is some case law relating to Hollywood where if the studio gets a proposal from a writer, blows off the writer, and then proceeds to produce the idea, there may be some traction.

I have no idea the facts. This may be a total extortion attempt to get a settlement from the cash cow, or there may be some bad facts--for a 20 year old idea (and actually, doesn't the idea go back to Da Vinci and before him?) its hard to believe much would come of this.

[theHandpuppet]

34. Might as well sue the author(s) of the Dead Sea Scrolls

After all, isn't that where those authors got THEIR story?

[gauguin57]

53. Those "Holy Blood...." guys have gotten so much p.r. since Brown's book ..

... that pisses me off. Their book has been revived BECAUSE of the DaVinci Code ... the big bookstore chains put all the Mary/Knights Templar/DaVinci code stuff in displays together (WITH "Holy Blood/Grail") ...

AND ... those guys have been on every one of those ABC, Discovery Channel, TLC, etc. etc. shows about "The Truth of the Da Vinci Code blah blah blah" --

And NOW they're suing. INGRATES. I wanna see that damned movie!

[Earth_First]

55. Jesus married Mary Magdalene...

There, care to sue me now?

Honestly, how can you copywrite ideas and theories?

[ET Awful]

59. That gives me an idea . . . I'm going to copyright the concept of

Intelligent Design and sue any school that tries to teach it without my permission.

:evilgrin:

[Theres-a]

60. PINGU!

I LOVE PINGU! NOOP, NOOP!:hi:

[lovuian]

62. Maybe this is just advertisement for Holy Blood Holy Grail

I think they are a bit jealous of Dan Brown's popularity...

[NashVegas]

65. I Can Think of *One Reason* They Might Have a Case

And it's because of Dan Brown's atrocious writing style!

Just about all of the dialog in TDaVC is pure exposition. If there are passages in there that are so similar that they may appear to have been directly lifted from HBHG (and with all that exposition I wouldn't be surprised), they may have cause.

It's been 20 years or more since I read HBHG. Brown's book actually goes wider in scope so .. I dunno.

[Orangepeel]

70. if he plagiarized, sure

that would be completely different. the article says they are suing because of the concept (or maybe idea -- I don't remember since I hit "reply"), but, of course, articles have been wrong before.

[anotherdrew]

69. they purported to write fact, not fiction, how can you steal "history" ?

[NashVegas]

72. You Don't

But historical novelists will, in their research, go stright to original source documents for their research.

If you were writing a novel based on the life of George Washington, sure, you'd read the modern bios for some subtext. But the most important thing you'd do is research what the chroniclers of his day were writing, you'd research his original letters.

Apparently people think Brown didn't do that.

[Dr Fate]

71. DC and Marvel Comics should sue them too.

Because The Da Vanci code aint nothing but old comic book stuff.

The Knights of Templar and adventures revolving around the grail have been a theme in comics stories for years.

[goforit]

74. Why didn't these assess come out when book was originally published?

[Djinn]

75. surely I can't be the only person

who feels that anyone who thinks their work "inspired" the Da Vinci Code should be hiding in a cave whipping themselves with birch switches, certainly wouldn't publically come out to claim ANY connection with that overrated pile of badly written pish