Sun, 14 Mar 2004 12:05:12
Dan Brown, plaigarist?
The New York Post says maybe...
Author Lewis Perdue is preparing to sue Brown for copyright infringement, claiming “The Da Vinci Code” is in large part stolen from his 1983 novel, “The Da Vinci Legacy” and its 1985 follow-up, “Daughter of God” - which were both recently optioned by “Survivor” creator Mark Burnett.
...
“This is the most blatant example of in-your-face plagiarism I’ve ever seen,” Olsson tells PAGE SIX’s Ian Spiegelman. “There are literally hundreds of a parallels.”
Though Olsson’s papers cite more than 70 instances where Brown’s book seems to mirror those by Perdue, Perdue says it represents only 40 percent of his evidence and that he’s saving the rest for court. He has two years left before the statute of limitations for copyright infringement expires.
Of Brown, he says: “I feel sorry for him. He has to live with that in his heart.”
I read The Da Vinci Code recently. It fired a lot of questions for me. I would not be pleased to find out that Dan Brown stole the work from someone else.
On the other hand, the idea behind the novel is based on history and certain beliefs in the real world that aren’t really able to be changed much, even in a work of fiction. Back to the original hand, though, is the fact that the fictional parts are remarkably similar.
I’ll be interested to know the outcome, since I have three other Dan Brown books here waiting to be read. If it turns out he’s a blatant thief, I might just use them to line the rat cage.
Posted by JimK at 12:05 PM on March 14, 2004
Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email to a friend |
Categories: Entertainment
Tags:
Comments:
#2 Posted by Chosesinconnues 
on 03/16 at 01:23 AM -
That book is freaking spell-binding. It’s made many traditional R.C.s EXTREMELY pissed off. (.. a “good thing” in my estimation)
#3 Posted by Sean Galbraith on 03/16 at 04:12 PM -
Chooseinconnues: I agree. It was a fantastic story. I really hope he didn’t plagerize it.. that would really piss me off after having enjoyed it so much.
#4 Posted by JimK on 03/16 at 05:32 PM -
Piero, I just ordered “The Da Vinci Legacy.” Looking forward to reading it.\r
\r
Chosen, Sean: word. If its theft, that blows, because it was really good. Very compelling core, a good pace, nicely planned twists and turns...everything a good novel should be.
#5 Posted by Sean Galbraith on 03/16 at 05:42 PM -
And it pissed off Christians! :-p
#6 Posted by Sean Galbraith on 03/17 at 04:14 AM -
Phew! Good to hear!
#7 Posted by Lewis Perdue on 03/18 at 05:25 AM -
Very spirited debate here. Thought maybe you might be interested in:\r
\r
http://www.davincilegacy.com/Infringement/\r
\r
I have not finished the section yet ... the pages that link off this portal page are not yet done. But you can get an idea what we’re working with.\r
\r
Also, you might find some interesting reading about this subject at:\r
\r
http://www.ideaworx.com/lewblog/ ... see March 5, 16 and 16 for plagiarism stuff.\r
\r
RSS (Subscribe)
Tip jars (Donate today!)
#1 Posted by Piero della Francesca
on 03/15 at 07:03 AM -
In my view, the most interesting parallels between “Da Vinci Legacy” and “Da Vinci Code” are not the obvious ones; they lurk in the details. As everyone who has read “Legacy” and “Code” knows, both books use Leonardo’s “Codex Leicester” as a key plot point. But look again: in “Legacy,” we’re told that “Codex Leicester” was written on parchment (that’s wrong; the “Codex Leicester” was written on linen paper; no scholar has ever suggested otherwise; indeed, claiming that Leonardo used parchment would be like claiming Michelangelo painted with acrylics). So how does Dan Brown describe “Codex Leicester” in “Da Vinci Code”? Drum roll, please ..... he says it’s on parchment! There is only one place Dan Brown could have found that “mistake.” Only one…