The Da Vinci Code Plagiarism Case

Dallasblog.com ^ | March 1, 2006 | Tom Pauken

[trashcanbred]

This is one spectacle that will be fun to watch. I’ll say one thing for the Brits – they sure have a much livelier press than we do have in the States. Maybe, that what competition does for you.

Don't say things like that... pretty soon we will see Lawrence O'Donnell as Anchor for CBS news...

[TXBubba]

claiming that the "central theme" of their book was used by Brown to concoct his story;

I don't care what people think of the da Vinci Code. Unless this guy copied their words I don't think they have a case. This "story" has been going around for years. They didn't come up with the story. It's like writing a book about aliens and then suing someone else who does the same thing. As if aliens is your idea.

[SkyDancer]

Read both books - you could say they both then plagerized the Bible ... you're right, the story has been around for centuries ....

[tallhappy]

Two of the authors of that book have sued, claiming that the "central theme" of their book was used by Brown to concoct his story

Seems pretty clear but these authors presented their "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" book as historical non-fiction which would negate their claims against the da Vinci Code author.

Apparently they now are at least tacitly, or maybe overtly, admitting their book was the load of hooey that is is.

[tallhappy]

Read both books - you could say they both then plagerized the Bible

Somehow I don;t think the Bible has the part where Jesu and Mary Magaldene have children and their is a blood lineage that exists today still (somehow in France) from their marriage.

So, I don't think that would be plagerism.

[Dinsdale]

In the 80s LedZeppelin sued some lame hair band for stealing one of their riffs.

It was clearly the same riff.

On stage the guitarist said 'yeah I stole it, but from Muddy Waters same as Jimmy Page did!'.

Now if someone could apply the same logic to disneys 'ownership' of the jungle book characters. (They made a movie a very few years after the book fell into public domain, now they hold trademarks and keep packs of starving lawyers in their vestibule).

If they had the same nerve 20th century fox would hold trademarks on Moses (based on the 10 commandments movie).

[Tim Long]

Don't say things like that... pretty soon we will see Lawrence O'Donnell as Anchor for CBS news...

Stop lying you creepy liar. That's a bunch of lies. : )

[Mamzelle]

Hard to figure, this popularity.

I read the book, and found it childish and obvious. It's not the Mary Madeline thing--it was just trite and utterly expected. One scene has the "da vinci expert" character fretting over a bit of scribbling, and I thought, "That can't be a ref to Da Vinci's famous Mirror Writing, that'd be too easy, and this guy is supposed to be a scholar"--sure enough, it was. That mirror writing is in any junior high bio of Leonardo, any Nat'l Geo article about his work.

[Paladin2]

Willie S. is famous on the basis of doing the same (retelling a story in a superior manner to critical acclaim).

[Prospero]

First thing I thought of when someone told me about this da Vinci Code silliness was that it was a ripoff of Holy Blood, Holy Grail.

Not that it matters that much. Why in the world would the bloodline of Son of David, Root of Abraham be important if Jesus of Nazareth faked his Resurrection?

That central question, whether he came out of that tomb or not, is central to Christianity. If He didn't, then who would care about anything else the man had to say or his ancient bloodline? He was either a fraud or the Son of the Living God. The central theme of these works pretty much holds that He was a fraud, which destroys the value of protecting his bloodline.

It is antithetical to historic analysis, and flies in the face of too much evidence that even nonbelievers can recognize and understand, particularly with regard to the behavior of his disciples after He Rose, and the state of the earliest Church before the Sack of Jerusalem, and the fact that these guys stuck to the story even to the point of painful executions at far points of the compass.

Fadish poppycock. Both books.

[SkyDancer]

What I meant was they both used MM as their heroine and extrapolated some things from the Bible esp. where one of the disciples says that Jesus loves her more than they - which in this case it was misinterpreted .... Jesus was speaking about the church ... he loved the church (ie, the people) more than they ... the authors of both books used that context to infer that Jesus was talking about MM ...

[tallhappy]

First thing I thought of when someone told me about this da Vinci Code silliness was that it was a ripoff of Holy Blood, Holy Grail.

Me too.

The troubling aspect, if there is one, is that the fad 20 years ago or whenever the Holy Grail book was published was still rather fringe. Now it is mainstream.

[trashcanbred]

Stop lying you creepy liar. That's a bunch of lies. : )

To this day I still cannot get over that. I got it burned on DVD somewhere...

[Tim Long]

I watched the clip recently, remembering O'Donnell had done something really crazy once. But I'm not sure that was it. I seem to remember him screaming like a maniac on some appearance, but I can't recall what he was talking about.

[wildbill]

I read the original book about when it first came out. The storyline does predate the Da Vinci Code and is pretty much the same.

The book claimed, however, to be a non-fiction book based on true facts. I don't know how you can plaigiarize 'true facts' unless you actually copy sentences word for word. Otherwise you could only have ONE history book.

[VOA]

bump

[Admin Moderator]

Once again - in the future, please posts items from your blog into our bloggers forum.

Thanks,

AM

[Ben Ficklin]

"Now it is mainstream"

Since HBHG was published there has been a great deal of research on, and books published about, the historical Jesus, or Jesus the Man versus Jesus of Faith.

Whereas Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln were members of the media, many with credentials have published since then.

[ApplegateRanch]

I got it burned on DVD somewhere...

Proper scholarly terminology is seared...SEARED, (in, on, into, onto) etc.