Tales of Jesus and Mary Magdalene returned to a London court Tuesday, as two authors appealed a ruling that Dan Brown did not infringe their copyright with his best-selling thriller "The Da Vinci Code." Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh claim Brown stole significant parts of his novel from their work "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail." Counsel for Baigent and Leigh told the panel of three Court of Appeal judges that the lower court ruling "was based on a misunderstanding of the law and of the claim."
January 17, 2007 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
Tales of Jesus and Mary Magdalene returned to a London court Tuesday, as two authors appealed a ruling that Dan Brown did not infringe their copyright with his best-selling thriller “The Da Vinci Code.”
Lawyers for Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh — who face a bill for more than 1 million pounds ($2 million) if the original verdict stands — claim that Brown stole significant parts of his novel from their nonfiction work “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail,” first published in 1982.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
