Da Vinci Code 'not copied'
2005-08-07 21:52
New York - A US federal judge ruled on Friday that Dan Brown had not plagiarised the work of another novelist in writing his phenomenally successful bestseller The Da Vinci Code.
Judge George Daniels found that there was "no substantial similarity" between Brown's book, which has topped bestseller lists around the world, and another mystery novel, Daughter of God by Lewis Purdue, published in 2000.
While acknowledging that the two books shared common themes, Daniels ruled that "any slightly similar elements are on the level of generalised or otherwise unprotectable ideas".
Brown and his publisher, Random House, had filed a lawsuit last year, seeking a declatory judgement that The Da Vinci Code had not infringed the copyright of Purdue's book.
Purdue filed a countersuit seeking a reverse judgement and $150m in damages.
Favour
Judge Daniels found in Brown's favour in both cases.
The Da Vinci Code is a quasi-historical thriller which claims Leonardo Da Vinci's painting "The Last Supper" holds the key to the Holy Grail.
It sets out that the Grail is not a chalice, as traditionally believed, but Mary Magdalene. It also claims Jesus and Mary married, had a child and that their bloodline survives to this day - a secret kept by the Roman Catholic Church.
Purdue's book covers similar religious themes and also uses a similar background of historical people, places and events.
"The factual details that underpin each book, however, are quite different," the judge ruled, adding that the heroes and heroines were different in both works.
"A reasonable lay observer would not conclude that The Da Vinci Code is substantially similar to Daughter of God," he concluded.
Derided by critics but devoured by the public, The Da Vinci Code is the best-selling adult fiction novel of all time on Amazon.com.