Brown's "Code" Is Unique

Federal appeals court upholds judge's ruling that Dan Brown's litterary juggernaut The Da Vinci Code did not infringe another author's copyrights

By Natalie Finn Apr 21, 2006 3:45 AMTags

The Da Vinci Code: Millions of people have read it, but only one man wrote it.

The 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a federal judge's ruling Tuesday when it agreed that Dan Brown's megabestseller did not infringe the copyrights of another author's books.

Brown's book about religious conspiracy theories and a frantic dash through France and the United Kingdom is not substantially similar to Lewis Perdue's 2000 book, Daughter of God, or his 1983 work, The Da Vinci Legacy, U.S. District Court Judge George B. Daniels ruled in August, saying that "any slightly similar elements are on the level of generalized or otherwise unprotectable ideas."

Perdue was really seeking to crack Brown's coffer, asking for $150 million in damages.

"This rapid and unanimous verdict confirms, once again, that this claim never had any merit," Brown said in a statement.

The good news comes barely two weeks after a British court dismissed a plagiarism case against Brown brought by two authors claiming that the Da Vinci Code scribe had lifted substantial portions of their 1982 nonfiction tome The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail. High Court Judge Peter Smith made his ruling in favor of Brown and publisher Random House Apr. 7, saying that the plaintiffs' case had "failed." Brown admitted that he and his wife, Blythe, who does research for him, had read the book, but not until his own idea was hammered out.

Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh's Holy Blood wholly benefited from their court scuffle with Brown, currently enjoying a perch at number 70 on Amazon's top sellers list (after toiling away in relative obscurity for years). Perdue's books, however, haven't budged out of the usual upper spots reserved for people who didn't write The Da Vinci Code, sue Dan Brown, win a Pulitzer Prize or pen a serial killer/legal/romantic thriller. (Last week, a Russian author threatened to get in on the lawsuit fun, saying Brown's thriller ripped off his art-history book, but so far Brown's lawyers haven't been pressed into action.)

Meanwhile, the paperback version of Brown's literary phenomenon is number one on the New York Times Bestseller List, having moved 500,000 copies in its first week out of the soft-covered gate.

More than 40 million hardcover copies have been devoured all over the world, entertaining some, offending others. The Roman Catholic organization Opus Dei, which is prominently featured in Brown's novel, has requested that Sony Pictures add a disclaimer to its upcoming Da Vinci Code film emphasizing the fictional nature of what moviegoers are about to witness. (Although, the fact that they're at the movies will be a pretty good tip-off).

The hugely anticipated film directed by Ron Howard reveals itself May 19, with Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou, Jean Reno, Ian McKellen and Alfred Molina filling the shoes of Brown's eclectic characters.

Meanwhile, Brown's legal woes have apparently kept him from more important business. His British publisher says that his follow-up to the Da Vinci Code won't be out by the end of the year as originally planned.