Perdue vs. Brown

The lawsuit against Dan Brown, filed by author Lewis Perdue (my old journalism advisor at UCLA), is moving forward. The New York Times reports that the judge in the copyright infringement case is reading Brown’s THE DAVINCI CODE and Lew’s  DAUGHTER OF GOD and THE DAVINCI LEGACY to
determine if they are "substantially similar" and if the suit should be allowed to proceed.

Judge George B. Daniels, of the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York, gave himself the assignment after lawyers representing Mr.
Brown and Mr. Perdue urged him to read the entire works rather than rely on the
excerpts in their court filings, which detail scores of similarities and
differences between the books. Judge Daniels said he would make a decision on
the suit in 30 to 60 days.

Shortly after "The Da Vinci Code" was published in early 2003, Mr. Perdue
asserted that the novel improperly drew on two of his earlier novels, "Daughter
of God," published in 2000, and "The Da Vinci Legacy," published in 1983 and
released in a new paperback edition last year.

Although Mr. Perdue had threatened to sue then, Mr. Brown and Random House,
the parent of Doubleday, the publisher of "The Da Vinci Code," first filed suit
over the matter. Last September, they asked the federal court in Manhattan for a
declaratory judgment that Mr. Brown’s book did not infringe on Mr. Perdue’s
copyright.

Mr. Perdue countersued, charging Mr. Brown and Random House with copyright
infringement and adding as parties to the suit the Sony Pictures and Columbia
Pictures divisions that are producing a film of "The Da Vinci Code." Mr.
Perdue’s court filings state that he has suffered damages "believed to be in
excess of $150 million."

Lew talks about the ruling (and charts the entire legal process as it goes on) on his DaVinci Crock blog. His observations include:

The most significant missed story in court on May 6, was the Random House
attorney’s concession — for the sake of the arguments in this case — that Dan
Brown had access to my works.  They have consistently argued that access
was lacking, that Dan Brown never heard of me or my books

Expect a ruling in the next month or two.

70 thoughts on “Perdue vs. Brown”

  1. You know, I’ve read both books, and I’ll be very surprised if this case goes forward — I don’t think there’s anything particularly similar about them (other than: the Church knows something secret!). If anyone needs to get suing, it’s the writers of _Holy Blood, Holy Grail__.

    Reply
  2. Oops indeed. I read all three. Four counting the Angels&Demons and even that one copied the element of the son of the pope character who kills him and then discovers it’s his father then he burns himself up.
    Yeah, that just chance. Moreover, the anti-matter/ particle beam under St. Peter’s tomb is identical to Legacy.
    The problem is what elements are protected?

    Reply
  3. That book has to be the worst I’ve read in recent years: it read like a screenplay padded out with some minor descriptions, and the “problems” the hero was supposedly solving wouldn’t have challenged a reasonably well-read fifteen-year-old.
    If I was the person responsible for it, I’d want to keep it as under wraps as long as humanly possible in case people came after me with pitchforks wanting their money back. And yes, if anyone should be suing for copyright infringement it should be the writers of “Holy Blood, Holy Grail”.
    Either way, it was tosh.

    Reply
  4. Diane:
    You may be amazed that the whole thing started when readers started emailing me saying they thought the books were almost the same. Some of those emails are in the legal filings here: http://www.davincilegacy.com/Infringement/PerduevBrown-Amended-010605.pdf
    My blog and other web sites linked off my main web site have a lot more.
    Significantly, Dan Brown would NOT testify under oath that:
    1. He wrote The Da Vinci Code
    2. That he conducted extensive research.
    3. That he never heard of me or my books.
    4. That The Da Vinci Code did NOT rip off my books
    I testified under oath. Why not Dan Brown? An affidavit is an easy no-brainer.
    One of the first things one learns in debate is that if there is an easy way to silence the other side on an issue, you do that and move on. Affidavits are as easy as things come, yet they have not done that. Why?

    Reply
  5. Significantly, Dan Brown would NOT testify under oath that:
    1. He wrote The Da Vinci Code
    2. That he conducted extensive research.
    3. That he never heard of me or my books.
    4. That The Da Vinci Code did NOT rip off my books

    Wow. I haven’t been to the website yet, but how ARE Dan Brown and his lawyers/publishers responding to the suit?
    Surely some sort of response must have been made!

    Reply
  6. I’m still on the Summary Judgment motion from 2004. Trying to start from the beginning.
    I haven’t read Brown’s stuff or Mr. Perdue’s stuff, but reading what Random House is saying–ouch! Dang, I wish this had been going on last semester in Copyright!

    Reply
  7. Daughter of God and Da Vinci Legacy didn’t exactly set the world on fire. Might Brown’s stuff be derivative of Perdue? Sure. (And worse, they’re crap.) Does it matter? Not so much.
    I could write a novel tomorrow about the Vatican and Opus D. and an ancient secret that Jesus had a kid and Brown wouldn’t be able to touch me. Nobody owns those ideas. You think “The Plot Against America” is the first book where Lindburgh becomes President of the Nazi States of America? That idea’s been old hat for twenty years. Stealing ideas -is- literature. Just present them in your own words, that’s all.
    Ever read Anne Fadiman’s book Ex Libris? The essay about plagiarism?
    Brown’s book, despite crapspackling, captured the imaginations of millions. Perdue’s didn’t. End of story.

    Reply
  8. Stealing ideas is not literature. That’s nonsense.
    The issue is to what extent, if any, did Brown draw upon Perdue’s work when creating his own. Surely there is a point at which such “inspiration” would cease being legitimate and cross into the realm of theft.
    That is what the lawsuit will decide. The similiarities certainly seem intriguing.

    Reply
  9. “Stealing ideas -is- literature. Just present them in your own words, that’s all.”
    But to what extent did Brown use those ideas? A discussion’s been raging on RARA about how influential RED HARVEST was. How many PI novels have had the hero walk into town and clean up all the corruption? A premise is not the story. The question is, did Brown lift the plot points? If you put both of Perdue’s books together, would they resemble THE DA VINCI CODE too closely?
    Larry Block wrote about this in TELLING LIES FOR FUN AND PROFIT. He called it “creative plagiarism,” which is not necessarily bad. It’s taking an idea you see elsewhere and running with it. The end result is a different story. But if you simply rewrite someone else’s tale scene for scene, or at least, chapter for chapter, then you have cause for concern.
    Given that the da Vinci’s alleged role keeping the Holy Grail and the legend of Jesus’ daughter both predate Perdue by about a century, I’m inclined to believe Perdue wants a piece of the DA VINCI pie. But then I haven’t read either Perdue or Brown, so what I’m inclined to believe is little more than meaningless water cooler chatter.

    Reply
  10. The most credible arguments are those based on the facts.
    Jim: you may want to look at the facts then draw a conclusion. I happen to agree with you that the things you mention are not protectible.
    After all, I was pretty well convinced back in the summer of 2003 that I was wrong about the plagiarism and it was all coincidence…until the forensic and other experts did their analysis.
    But you STILL have to grapple with the overarching question, if plagiarism ISN’T there, then why will Dan Brown NOT testify under oath that:
    * The Da Vinci Code did NOT rip off my books?
    * He never heard of me or my books?
    * He conducted extensive research?
    * He wrote The Da Vinci Code?
    As I mentioned in a comment, above: one of the first things one learns in debate is that if there is an easy way to silence the other side on an issue, you do that and move on. Affidavits are as easy as things come, yet they have not done that. Why?
    As far as the “pie” (pi?) goes, other than making sure our two kids have a college education taken care of, if we win anything from this case, my wife and I have decided that it will go to non-profits such as those we already support (see http://www.booksnblues.org as one example.)
    But there is plenty that is protected and ripped off.

    Reply
  11. Well, I love being refuted by those who don’t even read what we’re talking about. How Internet. Hopefully the judge will see what I did: taking the exact same plot points and putting them on the same pages with changed names symbolically identical. What are the odds of that happening randomly?
    As I understand it Lew’s Legacy sold well over a half-million copies back in 1983. That’s not exactly dismal. frankly I liked all three books. But then I don’t read fanfiction so apparently good literature escapes me.

    Reply
  12. “Jim: you may want to look at the facts then draw a conclusion. I happen to agree with you that the things you mention are not protectible.”
    Hence the “meaningless watercooler chatter” disclaimer, meaning the jury will know more than the rest of us.

    Reply
  13. David:
    Name one literary idea that’s unique to you. Or to Faulkner. Or hell, to James Joyce who wrote this thing called … eh, you know. Every scrap of literature is strewn with stolen ideas; everything we read and write is patchwork. Nothing wrong with that. I’m absolutely certain that someone has written a book about the hunt for a Jesus relict, in order to find some blood, get a cell, and clone the Son of God. Does that mean I can’t write that story, too–and steal the whole damn thing from Jurassic Park? (But I -am- going to trademark the title JURASSIC JESUS.)
    ‘Red Harvest’ is a fine example, but you can get a whole lot more specific. If I write a detective novel in which a loner PI with a dry wit, a friend on the force, and issues with authority, has to uncover a powerful family’s dark secret to solve a murder … shit. The authors of half the PI books in the past fifty years should be sued.
    On the other hand, I should stop talking about this. Not sure I agree that refusal to testify proves guilt, but I -am- sure that I haven’t got a clue what I’m talking about.

    Reply
  14. If you want to deconstruct plots far enough, there’s only a handful of them. But that’s meaningless, as is saying that “stealing ideas -is- literature.”
    Literature is about the unique and personal expression of a set of ideas, characters, settings, etc. The fact that two authors might both write about an outsider who goes into a strange town and finds that there is more going on than meets the eye…does that mean that one is stealing from the other? Or are they each writing about a common theme, filtered through their own artistic vision?
    I suppose you could make the point that they’re both stealing from the caveman who first grunted the story around the fire 10,000 years ago.
    But as you admit, you haven’t got a clue what you’re talking about. ๐Ÿ™‚

    Reply
  15. Adam:
    You are SO correct that ideas, basic plots, common themes, facts etc. cannot be protected.
    Expression is the issue.
    The devil is in the details … and so is plagiarism.

    Reply
  16. “Significantly, Dan Brown would NOT testify under oath that:
    1. He wrote The Da Vinci Code
    2. That he conducted extensive research.
    3. That he never heard of me or my books.
    4. That The Da Vinci Code did NOT rip off my books”
    These are good questions.
    So what is Random’s house response to them?
    Mark said to look in the April 22 filling. Where?
    There is probably a reason why they are not producing an affidavit (other than plagiarism.)
    Why wouldn’t Dan Brown say he wrote the DVC? Isn’t his name printed on all the DVC books, i.e., he wrote the book.

    Reply
  17. “Why wouldn’t Dan Brown say he wrote the DVC? Isn’t his name printed on all the DVC books, i.e., he wrote the book.”
    I agree. I would think that he would want to put that and the other issues (Did he plagiarize me? Did he do the research. Has he every heard of me or my works) to rest.

    Reply
  18. Mark writes:
    “Four counting the Angels&Demons and even that one copied the element of the son of the pope character who kills him and then discovers it’s his father then he burns himself up.”
    Here are the storylines from both books:
    A&D: son of pope, kills pope, discovers pope WAS his father, burns himself-up on purpose for greater good of church
    DoG: son of priest, blackmails pope, discovers that priest IS his father, dies in accidental fire trying to save shroud
    I just think these storylines are too different. Sure there are some similarities, but I just read a book where a reverend had a child and the child found out later. I also read another book where some party is blackmailing the church.
    There are similar ideas everywhere. How many similarities do you need to say that the idea was stolen? We can also argue what is a similarity?
    When are two ideas different enough?
    Who knows…

    Reply
  19. Even more David since in my recent reading of the books, I recall the priest ran into the fire “deliberately” just as the other set himself on fire. He was committing suicide i.e they’re the same. He changed the names and jobs and put them in identical situations at ecactly the same time in the books. That’s minor alteration which is what plagiarists do as I understand it.

    Reply
  20. I don’t think he was trying to commit suicide. He was trying to save the shroud at all cost even though it meant death. If he could have escaped, he would have done so.
    The situation is not identical.
    One is trying to get the shroud to blackmail the pope because he wants to become pope.
    The other, he sees that there is no way out for him and to save the faith in the church, it must appear that he disappears (i.e., miracle).
    The fact that it happens near the end is typical of thrillers.
    Aren’t the story lines different enough?
    I first read A&D, then I read DoG. It never even dawned on me that they were the same. Maybe if you read them in reverse order?

    Reply
  21. Yes I did. It struck me as very similar. He realizes he’s just killed his father and runs into the fire which by then is out of control. It’s suicide by action. What’s different is Langon leaping out of a plane with a tarp and living by landing in the Tiber. He practically doesn’t miss a beat after this. That part is Brown’s.

    Reply
  22. As close as the ideas are as Mark describes them above, they are suspicious and perhaps one piece of evidence, but they probably do not merit copyright protection BY THEMSELVES … what you have to look at is all the details in context: how similar and the characters, their motivations, their interactions, the sequence of their actions etc.
    My legal case is built on the fact that all those details — the expression — are overwhelmingly similar.
    That is why Random House cannot afford for this to go to trial and that is why they will not allow anyone associated with the Da Vinci Code — especially Dan Brown –to testify under oath, either in person or via an affidavit.
    Finally, the Supreme Court is clear on one thing: “No plagiarist can excuse the wrong by showing how much of his work he did not pirate.” — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Learned Hand
    In other words, pointing out the differences does not excuse the similarities.
    Random House has obscured the entire case by focusing on the things that are different without dealing with all the similarities … other than to say there are none… but not bothering to refute our evidence.

    Reply
  23. Lewis said: “In other words, pointing out the differences does not excuse the similarities.”
    Are you saying that the storylines I pointed out are different?

    Reply
  24. David:
    I have raised the same question and she claims not.
    Over on a Dan Brown forum she began a thread with the following leading post:
    “Hello Dan Brown fans,
    I’m sure you’ve all heard that some people believe that the Da Vinci Code story was taken from Lewis Perdue’s 3 previous books (Daugther of God, Linz Testament and the Da Vinci Legacy).
    Has anyone read the Daughter of God?
    I can’t beleive that some people say they are similar. I really didn’t find that. The story is different and the writing styles are also very different.
    There are some similarities but what book doesn’t have a good guy running away from the bad guy (who is accusing him of something). And how can you compare 3 books with 1 book?
    (Wow! The hero’s age is between 30-40 in both books!!)
    I have lots to say on this subject since I’ve actually read the Daughter of God. I’d like to read the Legacy as well.
    I’d like to hear what you think about this controversy and what you think of Perdue’s books if you’re read them.”

    Reply
  25. She’s in Canada as I understand it. Not that it’s pertinent to the topic but that’s not RH central. Some people won’t understand these “substantialy similar” concepts, if you just change the names and a couple locations it’s a new book to them. I was astounded when I ran into the climax scenario in A&D. I previously read it in DOG. Not only that, I read the rest of DVL in A&D. Anti-matter/particle beam; assassin trys to kill the pope. These are all in DVL. Is this supposed to be a coincidence?

    Reply
  26. Mark, I am willing to consider that Vanessa is telling the truth and is not working for Random House even though her arguments are 100% like theirs in tone, style etc.
    And I do agree with you that there are way too many similarities to be coincidence.

    Reply
  27. Oh, another thing: We have a number of forensic experts working on this, including one from Canada, and his analysis is that Vanessa writes as if she is from the Toronto area … and if so, THAT is Random House territory.

    Reply
  28. People, people, easy on the conspiracy theories already!
    Vanessa is probably just a Dan Brown fan who is (understandably) alarmed by the idea that he might be getting targeted by a golddigging (in HER mind, at least) plagiarism lawsuit.
    Like I’ve said before, I’m reserving judgment, but how Vanessa is responding is the same manner in which I responded when I read about the Nancy Stouffer lawsuit against JK Rowling. Fans don’t like seeing their author come under attack.
    As for this Saddoodeen character, “Deep Throat” routines are very compelling in fiction, but I somehow doubt they deserve much credibility in the real world–especially when the “Deep Throat” is broadcasting his “evidence” all over the internet.

    Reply
  29. He/she isn’t broadcasting the actual data. This is big time money Jocelyn. The so-called golddigger wrote the first similar book in 1983 and the other one in 1999. It may be that the DVC was actually fanfiction.

    Reply
  30. I’m not accusing Lewis of golddigging at all–I’m just saying that’s probably how Brown fans view it.
    And if Lewis’s claim is true, Mark, what Brown has done puts him below even the least-talented fanwriter.
    We at least CITE our source!

    Reply
  31. Hm…Mr. York, it occurs to me that if the plotlines between all those books are so similar than DVC may be good fanfiction in that it stays close to the source material, but bad because the author did it for profit and did not cite his source.
    I haven’t read any of the books. So I’m standing around the water cooler with the other fellows. But somebody said ‘fanfiction’ so I had a pavlovian response. Sorry. Off to wipe up the drool.
    This is going to be a landmark case. Maybe I should go read all those books. I’ll get DVC out of the library.

    Reply
  32. You certainly should Claire. I was being facetious, but as you point out there’s some basis for it. Of course Brown used his own characters to perform basically the same functions as Lew’s. Complete with identical backgrounds and personalities and physical characteristics. A fanfictioner would go ahead and write Robert Langdon’s torid tales of their own as I understand it. Shamelessly.

    Reply
  33. A fanfictioner would go ahead and write Robert Langdon’s torid tales of their own as I understand it. Shamelessly.
    They would. And it would likely depart so much from the original tale that one would wonder why s/he stole the characters in the first place. I’m finding the symmetry of this interesting. Fanfiction people steal the characters and plagiarizers (disclaimer: as in the metaphorical plagiarizer, not accusing Mr. Brown of plagiarizing) keep the plot, but change the names of the characters.
    But – if fanficioners changed the names of the characters AND wrote a story that has nothing to do with the inspirational work, they’d have a work of Original Fiction.
    Wait a minute, look what I just googled. I figured there had to be some if the thing is so popular.
    http://www.fanfiction.net/c2/9614/0/1/

    Reply
  34. For those not dropping in on the Da Vinci Crock blog, I thought I’d cross post the following offer for a rewards for information.
    I will name a character in my next book after the first person to decrypt the name Ahamedd Saaddoodeen and determine what it actually means or stands for.
    In addition, I will also name a character after the first person who correctly provides the answer to the connection between Ahamedd Saaddoodeen and Dan Brown’s wife, Blythe Newlon Stafford Brown and why database records show them with the same Social Security number and date of birth.
    Finally, I will name the hero or heroine after the first person who correctly provides the definitive role that Jason Kaufman has played in this entire process.
    The winner may elect not to use their name but to transfer the reward to a friend or family member.

    Reply
  35. why database records show them with the same Social Security number and date of birth
    You mean Mr. Brown’s wife and the encrypted name have the same SS# and date of Birth? Does she write and is that a pseudonym? (yes, that’s the obvious off the top of the head answer.)
    Mr. Perdue, forgive my presumption, but does your lawyer say it’s okay for you to do this stuff? It’s one thing to build a legal case, another to look like you’re waging a vendetta. Why not let the judicial process work?

    Reply
  36. Oops. Just read the links. Amazing what can happen when one reads the info provided. I should scurry back to my water cooler.
    Ahamedd Saaddoodeen is Deep Throat. But if Mrs. Brown and this person are one in the same, why would she use a traceable pseudonym to post damaging information even if only for the purpose of trapping Mr. Perdue in a libel suit. Blogspot doesn’t require SS #’s to register. Why not call herself Jane Smith? Or is it all wrapped up in some weird quasi-religious DVC thing?

    Reply
  37. Claire:
    Several things: I stated UNequivocally my believe that the “Saaddoodeen” posting is NOT Ms. brown.
    re: your other questions: my attorneys read my blog several times per day.
    Vendetta? Hardly considering the sleazy tactics, misreprsentations, distortions and outright provable lies the Random House lawyers have used against me. Read my blog. You’ll see what they have tried and how their lies are contradicted by the court records and other third-party sources.
    Re: justice and the legal process
    Estimates by my own attorneys and others feel that the result one gets in a copyright infringement case is decided about 35 or 40 percent on the merits of the case and the remaining 60 to 65% by “lawyering: and the luck of the judge you get and the mood they’re in when they read the materials.
    I believe I have very good lawyers and the judge seems like a very smart, stand-up guy, but any absolute confidence I have in the legal system is tempered by all those factors and the many other ones I have expressed on my blogs.
    The legal process is at work, but as I have written several times here and on my own blogs, copyright infringement law is so fuzzy and lacking clear standards from court to court that justice may or may not get done.
    The American legal system is OF the lawyers, BY the lawyers and FOR the lawyers … justice sometimes gets a back seat to that.
    Add to that the fact that Random House and its huge corporate parent, Bertelsmann have nearly unlimited resources to hammer me with. I must use what I can.
    Thus, I am convinced that having the _provable_ truth out there about this whole mess is a necessary path to justice and holding people accountable.
    And I’ve got a record stretching back several decades that indicate that I’ll work as hard as possible and for as long as necessary to find some measure of justice … usually it has not been on my behalf, but what I have learned about putting congressmen and others in jail with the facts is certainly valuable to my own case.

    Reply
  38. You have guts, Mr. Perdue. I admire them. I felt stupid asking those questions, but couldn’t glean from your blogs.
    Agreed about lawyers and the legal system, been hanging around them my whole life. I worried that you were harming your case by putting out that last post. It does look like you are saying that Mrs. Brown and the other person are the same person. This is how somebody unfamiliar who is standing by the water cooler sees it, or at least that’s how it looked to me. Yet your other posts contradict that, hence, the confusion. Also, making a contest out of discovering who that other person is, gives the appearance that you don’t take it seriously. Just a thought.
    The copyright laws are of concern to me. Artists don’t have much protection where their work is concerned, so I’m very interested in how this case pans out. If you’re allegations are valid (not saying they aren’t, I haven’t read the books yet, but I intend to) and you win this case, you’ll be doing original artists everywhere a really big service. So I wish you the best.

    Reply
  39. The copyright laws are of concern to me. Artists don’t have much protection where their work is concerned, so I’m very interested in how this case pans out. If you’re allegations are valid (not saying they aren’t, I haven’t read the books yet, but I intend to) and you win this case, you’ll be doing original artists everywhere a really big service. So I wish you the best.
    One good thing in Lewis’s favor is that straightup plagiarism has a much stronger body of law backing the original copyright owner than pretty much any other. Whereas the fanfiction thing has the issues of parody/fairuse/nonprofit/etc, plain old plagiarism is as illegal and blacklisted in the media as ever.
    What Lewis has claimed is, theoretically, quite correct: all Dan Brown would need to do to more or less end this case is offer some proof (even if it’s only a stack of affadavits) that he did his own research on the concepts and ideas that ended up in his story. On the other hand, if Lewis lands his hands on proof of some type that Dan Brown was poring over HIS books while doing his “research”–that’s a pretty hard-core plagiarism case. It would be one thing if Lewis’s book was nonfiction–then Brown might get away with calling it “research.” But because both books are fiction, if it turns out the former was used in writing the latter, and the experts prove the similarities…this could get REAL interesting.
    Most plagiarism cases in copyright law involve medium-crossing–ie, claims that a TV show plagiarized a book or something. This one could be very ground-breaking.

    Reply
  40. Good point, I forgot about that case! I remember we talked about it (it’s always the actor/movie/book names that stick in our heads, not the case names) but much more.

    Reply
  41. Art Buchwald’s Coming to America lawsuit was NOT based on a perjury claim, but on a breach of contract. Buchwald had written a treatment for the studio, which owed him certain recompense if a movie were based on it. The studio claimed that the movie was not based on that treatment. Buchwald won.

    Reply
  42. I didn’t say anything about perjury. Granted it wasn’t a care of plagiarism per se, but Buchwald was able to convince the court that the script that Murphy and Landis wrote was similiar enough to the treatment that he wrote that he was owed payment. So courts are willing, at least in theory, to accept an argument based on one writer stealing from another. I brought it up because it’s one of the few examples that come to mind that relate to this. It’s a damn difficult thing to prove.

    Reply
  43. Ah, so it was “work for hire.” That is quite different.
    Yeah, I’ve been wracking my brains for a straightup literary plagiarism-copyright infringement suit, (aside from The Stouffer Golddigging, which doesn’t really count because it was so dang frivolous) and can’t remember hitting any in class. The cases I recall and the ones that I’ve seen cited by both sides in their memos (yes, it’s true that I read neither book but I’ve read the damn memos in my free time. I’m a law student. So laugh at me!) all involve medium-crossing. Book to TV, book to play, play to movie, etc. Or nonfiction book to fiction TV. Never this.
    You’d think there would be SOME major case defining straightup plagiarism in copyright!

    Reply
  44. I’m a law student too so I’m not laughing at what you’re doing. Pertaining to studying law and writing books that is. No fiction to fiction copying infringement anywhere?

    Reply
  45. True, I guess there have been some song-to-song cases, but nothing I can recall in literature. (Probably because it’s a lot easier for a lay person to identify telling similarities in two pieces of music than in two pieces of writing.)

    Reply
  46. I have to say that I am very disappointed and disheartened. I have read all the books (DoG, Legacy, Linz Testament, DVC, A&D) and do have an opinion as a reader. Obviously it’s not what you want to hear.
    I am giving my opinion and giving counter arguments and for that I am being suspected of working for the other side and being tracked. How do you think that makes a reader/fan feel?
    I have enjoyed Dan Brown’s books & Lewis Perdue’s books. I only find them different enough, and I am arguing that point.
    (Thank you Jocelyn i.e.,post on May 14, 2005 07:42 PM)

    Reply
  47. The link to the investigative reports I mentioned in my blog are at: http://www.davincicrock.com/redacted-data/
    I have been over the reports a dozen times to redact things that would help stalkers, fanatical fans and identity thieves. I have blotted out the street number on all current addresses.
    Does anything strike you? Have I missed something? Do you recognize a person or an address?
    Significantly, there is nothing in the files that is not publicly available. Any reader, any interested person can obtain all of the data, thus I am not revealing any confidential information NOT available to the general public.
    The resulting documents represent a fairly small portion of whatโ€™s been developed.
    There is also an Excel spreadsheet summary detailing the overlaps at each address for Saaddoodeen, Blythe and Dan Brown.
    This information is being posted in the hopes that you or some other blog reader will have lived at one of the addresses concurrently (or know someone who did) and will remember a fact or two that will help solve the Saaddoodeen/Brown connection mystery

    Reply
  48. I think those slating Stouffer should not comment about the lwasuit unless they know the full details. I know many of you are fans of “Rowling’s work”, but how would you feel if someone stole your work and passed it off as their own? Terrible, so spare a thought for Stouffer. Rowling as proved herself to be a liar in interviews by contradicting herself. JKR did not write any books in a cafe – think about it – little money she said she had, so she wouldn’t have been able to afford to! You would get thrown out of cafes for just drinking one cuppa and spending hours there writing!
    She failed to provide the original manuscripts at the court, she had no evidence to dispute Stouffer’s claims. Yet she won. Why did she win> Because of her status. Had Rowling not been as famous as she is, the fact is, she would no doubt at all, have lost. Harry Potter books are NOT Rowling’s work at all.

    Reply

Leave a Comment