He believed both his mother’s religion and his father’s science, but became confused when the two conflicted. “I owe everything to my parents,” said Brown, whose father was a math teacher and mother was a church organist and piano teacher.īrown says he was encouraged to ask questions at home as a child. “My publisher wants good books, not quick ones,” he said.īrown began the session by introducing his parents and telling the crowd his mother Constance’s birthday was Saturday. The author said he felt no pressure to complete the novel soon. Perhaps more concrete infringement will come to the surface then.“The novel will be set in Europe, in the most fascinating place I’ve ever been,” he said.Īsked when the new book will be released, he said only “It’ll be done when it’s done.” Regardless, it’ll be interesting to see how this one progresses through the appeals courts. Since there are a relatively limted number of ideas available out there, especially in the world of historical drama, copyright protection of a vague idea is a pretty scary notion. Brown did lift anything, it was not specific enough to warrant infringement. In the end though, the court found that, if Mr. However, it’s often difficult to prove that two characters are the same person, especially when the latter changes various details and doesn’t try to trade on the public’s knowledge of the previous author’s work. This is why fan fiction is automatically the property of the original creators. If this had been a case of word-for-word copying or even paraphrasing, it seems likely that the case would have turned out very differently.Ĭourts have also offered some protection for ideas when dealing with copyright laws. Ideas fall under patent law and, thankfully, there’s no such thing as a literary patent.
Copyright law by in large protects words, images and sounds, not ideas. Pedue’s works and steal the ideas, a big jump in my opinion, then the case doesn’t change very much. The case is interesting because it shows how much of a gray area plagiarism really is. He said that “A reasonable average lay observer would not conclude that The Da Vinci Code is substantially similar to Daughter of God.” He went on to say, quite correctly, that, “Ideas and general literary themes themselves are unprotectible under the copyright law.” Lewis Perdue, author of “Daughter of God” and “The Da Vinci Legacy”, claimed that Brown stole many of the ideas for the “The Da Vinci Code” from his books including the “divine feminine” and the role of Roman Emperor Constantine in converting the church to from female-dominated to male-dominated. Several news sources have reported that Dan Brown, the author of “The Da Vinci Code”, won his battle in Federal Distict Court over accused plagiarism in the book.
0 kommentar(er)
