Britain's Court of Appeal rejected a lawsuit Wednesday from two authors who claimed novelist Dan Brown stole their ideas for his novel "The Da Vinci Code." Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh had sued Brown's publisher, Random House, claiming he had copied from their 1982 nonfiction book, "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail." The judges said copyright protects an author's labor in researching and writing, but doesn't extend to facts, theories and themes. The authors now face legal bills of about $6 million.
March 29, 2007 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
Britain’s Court of Appeal rejected a lawsuit Wednesday from two authors who claimed novelist Dan Brown stole their ideas for his blockbuster novel “The Da Vinci Code.”
Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh had sued Brown’s publisher, Random House Inc., claiming he had copied from their 1982 nonfiction book, “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail.”
Presented by BigVoodoo
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.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
Truly exceptional Bergen County New Jersey Law Firm is growing and seeks strong plaintiff's personal injury Attorney with 5-7 years plaintif...
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
