The DaVinci Code Case

It doesn’t sound like things are going too well for the two authors of "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail," who claim that Dan Brown copied their ideas in “The DaVinci Code." Given that the legends about Jesus and Mary Magdalene have been around for centuries, the charge did seem like a bit of a stretch. Just because YOU write something about something doesn’t mean that no one else can address the same subject.

What I might believe is that Brown used "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail” to shorten his own necessary research for the novel. Is that the same thing as violating copyright?

I mean, let’s be practical, if you were going to write a novel based upon some historical event or historical legend, wouldn’t you consult any books written about the topic? Especially if we’re talking about a topic whose treatment, from a historical viewpoint, has been fairly limited.

I guess it’s even possible that "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" was the initial inspiration for Brown to write something around that theme. Brown tends to write about conspiracy type stuff and the hero of “The DaVinci Code” takes on the Illuminati in his first adventure “Angels & Demons.”

Interestingly I thought “Angels & Demons” was the better of the two books and I’ve been trying to locate an Illuminati recruitment center even since as that’s clearly where my sympathies lie. To be honest, "The DaVinci Code" was basically the same plot built around the same Robert Langdon character. The characters had different names but all of the same character types and the same plot elements were present. The brilliant murdered father and the daughter that helps Langdon follow the complex trial of clues, the sinister agent of evil going around reducing the church population, the historical legend that turns out to be true, the law enforcement official that doesn't trust Langdon and even the surprise real villain. Just the city, the legend and the artist responsible for the clues changed in order to protect the publisher.

Anyway while I suppose Brown could have used "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" to a greater or lesser extent, I’m not sure he did anything wrong and its unlikely anyone could prove it anyway. In other words, I don’t have a clue about the nuances of copyright infringement.

Since the case appears to be going nowhere, we’ll probably get the movie on May 19th which, by coincidence, is Malcolm X’s birthday. This will be the first movie since the last Harry Potter that I’ll be looking forward to. The only problem is, my wife didn’t read the book and I may have a problem talking her into going.

While there was some complaining from the Christian Right about the book (what is it about the concept of F-I-C-T-I-O-N that you don’t understand?), I don’t really expect much commotion about the movie when it comes out, but we’ll see.