Posted on 03/01/2006 8:09:12 AM PST by stainlessbanner
Brown clearly used Baigent's concept, but wrote a whole new plot.
They have no case.
I can't wait to see the movie. My husband read the book. I am reading Angels and Demons now, it is by same author.
I tried it and found it slow-going after The Code. Never finished it or State of Fear! This is the first I've heard of the lawsuit. I thought The Code was a great book and oddly was not offended by it, even as a Christian.
"Holy Blood,Holy Grail".Interesting book.I can't attest to the veracity of the author's assertion(s),but it reads like a good mystery.Have to ck out "The DaVinci Code".
Let's riot over this blasphemy and kill the authors!
Oh wait, nevermind, we're not Muslim.
:)
Back to the topic, I think the first author is just trying to cash in on the fact that someone else made more money off the basic idea than he did.
You cannot copyright ideas, but our absurd patent system might have let him patent it.
The DaVinci Code was so badly written that I couldn't get past the first few pages. As a writer, I feel dismayed by the inept prose of so many best-sellers.
Oh, I do agree. I was looking forward to a good read,(Da Vinci Code) but it was so poorly written even the intriguing idea got dead from Brown's writing.
Concur on both points. I have an old copy of HBHG that I read years ago. When I first heard of DVC, it sprang to mind & I dug it out & reread portions before reading DVC. I didn't know if the original authors were even still alive, but I knew they had a great plagiarism lawsuit if they were. I was happy when they filed it. This was far more blatant than Alex Haley's Roots plagiarism.
You do know Brown laughs all the way to the bank!
And I suspect antiRepublicrat is correct: ideas are not copyrightable.
You might find this rticle interesting.
Amen!
Since when do original ideas count for anything?
Stealing is stealing is stealing.
I can't wait to see the movie. My husband read the book. I am reading Angels and Demons now, it is by same author.
I am looking so forward to seeing this movie also. First Tom Hanks is a great Actor and the book is superb. I think this year Hollywood just might start making money. LOL.
"Oddly" is an understatement. The book portrays an unrisen Christ marrying Mary Magdalene. All the book does is take a shot at the divinity of Christ, and the legitimacy of Chrisianity itself. So it is odd that that didn't offend you, maybe you should read 1 Corinthians 13-16:
13But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. 19If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. 20But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
Thanks for the harsh words. I would hasten to point out that even Brown never claimed it to be anything more than a work of FICTION.
While I was not offended, neither did I take it for gospel! Like I said, I'm a Christian. One who believes I should 'judge not, lest I be judged!'
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.