Related
Advertisements *
Elsewhere
Subscribe: RSS
RNB's RSS feed What is this? |
Subscribe: Email
![]() |
![]() Subscribe by Email What is this? |
Most Popular
- Mercy Ministries exorcism books leaked
- RNB Roundup: Atheism ads get tax support; Holland bans Magic Mushrooms; Fritzl turns to Buddhism; More…
- UK pastor who claimed to produce ‘miracle babies’ another step closer to extradition
- Europe court says no to turban on Sikh’s driving licence
- Child of Jehovah’s Witnesses can be given blood, judge says
- Two teens file lawsuit against evangelist Tony Alamo over beatings
- Decision expected this week on whether parents will face trial in faith healing death
- Church tries Goth Liturgy
- Ganas commune co-founder sues current and former members
- Japan: Security agency calls for extension of surveillance of Aum cult
Supreme Court won’t hear Da Vinci Code case
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Monday handed a victory to the author of the “The Da Vinci Code,” refusing to consider a case alleging copyright infringement.
Author Lewis Perdue contends that Dan Brown’s megathriller is substantially similar to his book, written years before the 2003 publication of “The Da Vinci Code.
Some 60.5 million copies of “The Da Vinci Code” are in print worldwide.
Perdue argues that affidavits detailing similarities between his book, “Daughter of God,” and Brown’s book should have been considered by a federal judge, who rejected them. The judge ruled that no reasonable juror could find parts of Perdue’s work substantially similar to “The Da Vinci Code.” An appeals court upheld the ruling.
In one of the rejected affidavits, a literary expert found the evidence of infringement overwhelming. In another affidavit, a foreign linguistics expert found the similarities to be “striking.”
Perdue had alleged that Brown copied the basic premise of “Daughter of God,” including notions that history is controlled by victors, not losers, and the importance of the Roman Emperor Constantine in requiring a transition from a female to a male-dominated religion, the judge said.
Brown and Random House Inc. had filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Manhattan seeking a declaratory judgment that his work does not infringe on Perdue’s.
In a countersuit, Perdue asked the judge to rule that there was infringement and award $150 million in damages.
The case is Perdue v. Brown and Random House Inc., 06-213.
What You Can Do From Here
|
Read More Articles On These Topics
Share, Blog About, Bookmark, or Email This Article
Subscribe
Read Another Article
Find Related Information
Find Related Books
|
Share This Article
To share this page simply copy and paste one of these URL's:



