• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Dan Brown

beer good said:
True, but aren't they publishing it as a work of non-fiction - ie. they claim it is or may well be a historic fact? The way I understand it, you can only have copyright to something you yourself made up, not something which existed independently of you before you discovered it. Can Pythagoras claim copyright to right triangles, or Newton to gravity?

Never mind. I suppose the court will eventually decide. Either way, both Baigent, Leigh and Brown make a lot of money.
Click to expand...


Not from me. I'm not buying the book or watching the movie.
 
Dan Brown's just been quoted on radio four as saying he couldn't finish reading the books in question because they were too difficult.:confused: So he couldn't have copied the ideas. But then goes on to say that he used an anagram of names to create one of his main characters names. :p
 
Well, as you probably guessed, I'm not very bright, but it looks genuine...

I am the author of four novels, Digital Fortress (1998), Angels & Demons (2000), Deception Point (2001), and The DaVinci Code (2003). In this statement I make reference to all four of my books, and I assume that the reader has some familiarity with my books but, in particular, has read The Da Vinci Code.
Click to expand...

:eek: :eek: :eek:

He assumes the reader has read DVC??


​
 
steffee said:
He assumes the reader has read DVC??
Click to expand...
Considering this is a testimony in a court case regarding what is in DVC and where it came from, I think that's a safe assumption.
 
Doug Johnson said:
Did you read it?
Click to expand...

I did!, but then again, I'd read just about anything.:p The four pages of his testimony were necessary. I believe that he provides a compelling case that he didn't copy the works of the other two authors. His background, interests, and travels to see specific sites mentioned in his books, are evidence as to where "the ideas" came from. The conspiracy mentioned in the DVC isn't an esoteric one only known to a few people. To me, it's akin to writing a book about Elvis pumping gas at a 7-11 and having someone sue you for what they were writing about. On a large, common topic like that, I don't know if anyone has the exclusive rights to it.
 
beer good said:
Considering this is a testimony in a court case regarding what is in DVC and where it came from, I think that's a safe assumption.
Click to expand...

Well maybe, obviously the prosecution will have to have read it, but everyone involved? Isn't that what evidence is for?
 
steffee said:
Well maybe, obviously the prosecution will have to have read it, but everyone involved? Isn't that what evidence is for?
Click to expand...
The text of the book in a plagiarism case is evidence. How can you possibly tell if book A ripped book B off if you haven't read either? Hence, both prosecution, defense and judge will have read it. I hope. Otherwise it would be like judging a murder case without being told who's been murdered and how.
 
But that's exactly the point though. The prosecution has to prove that he plagiarised. Why should the judge / magistrates / whatever have to read the book too? Then there's no need for a prosecutor.

The judge doesn't read all the evidence in a murder case, but they go on what the prosecution states, and how the defence counter-act it. That's the whole legal game, which lawyer is better.


​
 
If the goal is just to see who's the best lawyer, couldn't they just play tennis for it? (Incidentally, there's no prosecutor here, is there? Isn't this a civil case?)

But I'll admit that I don't know the British legal system. Perhaps that's how it works, and it'll end with the judge declaring that Brown ripped (or didn't rip) off Baigent/Leigh, though he has no idea how since he hasn't read either book. It would certainly add another layer of Kafkaism to an already ludicrous trial.

The point is fairly moot anyway, I think. There are, at last count, exactly 174 people in the world who haven't yet read DVC. :rolleyes:
 
Oh, ok. That is how it works in the UK, even in civil cases. Especially in civil cases.

174? Are you sure? I thought the figure was much fewer than that ;) :rolleyes:
​
 
steffee said:
174? Are you sure? I thought the figure was much fewer than that ;) :rolleyes:
​
Click to expand...
Well, let's see: at last count, the Pope, the disappearing Buddha boy, the Lonely Astronaut and, for some reason, Michael Jackson had not yet read it. However, I happen to know that there's a secret society in the South of France whose only doctrine is to never read the DVC, and for various important reasons they number exactly 170 people. I'd tell you their names, but I think it's best not to. Albino monk assassins and all that, you know. :D
 
I'm not sure if steffee is now in agreement with beer good here, but for the record, beer good is right. There is no prosecution in this case: there are claimants (or plaintiffs) - Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh - and a defendant - Random House, Dan Brown's publishers. The judge hears the evidence and decides on the facts through interpretation of the law. The claimants or defendants could submit The Da Vinci Code in its entirety as evidence, or alternatively - as I believe happened here - the judge could admit it of his own volition, which is why the case was adjourned early in the proceedings, for the judge to read both books.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top