Original posting here: http://www.cbc.ca/arts/books/story/2006/11/13/davincicode-perdue-court.html
Da Vinci Code author Dan Brown has won yet another case against him claiming copyright infringement from another writer.
The U.S. Supreme Court refused Monday to hear a case from U.S. author Lewis Perdue alleging Brown's bestselling thriller was substantially similar to his book, Daughter of God. Perdue had lost his case in 2005 in a New York district court and pursued it through the appeals court process.
The Da Vinci Code, by Dan Brown, has sold more than 60 million copies worldwide.
(Canadian Press)
The Da Vinci Code, published in 2003, has sold more than 60 million copies worldwide and spawned a movie in 2006 starring Tom Hanks.
In Monday's ruling, the court upheld a previous decision, which said no reasonable juror would find Brown's work to be significantly comparable to Daughter of God, published in 2000.
The court rejected several affidavits provided by Perdue, including one from a foreign linguistics expert who found similarities between the two books to be "striking."
The fictional premise of The Da Vinci Code centres on coded messages painter Leonardo Da Vinci left in his works, revealing that Jesus had married Mary Magdalene and fathered children and, most importantly, that the bloodline survives to the present day. The plot also alleges the Catholic church conspired to hide this fact.
Daughter of God chronicles a husband-and-wife team who unearth a document describing the life of a fourth century female Christian messiah named Sophia.
Perdue, who was seeking $150 million US in damages, said Brown lifted the underlying focus of Daughter of God, including the part about Roman Emperor Constantine decreeing a transition from a female to a male-dominated religion.
The case is a second victory this year for Brown and his publisher, Random House.
Last April, a judge in England ruled in favour of Brown in a high profile case involving authors Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, who had launched a lawsuit against Random House claiming that Brown had "stolen the architecture" of their 1982 book Holy Blood, Holy Grail for The Da Vinci Code.
Holy Blood, Holy Grail was a non-fiction book that focused on the same theme as Brown's book. The judge in the case said Brown was "perfectly entitled to dress up factual scenarios to give an illusion that supports his fiction."
Plagiarism charges continue to dog Brown. In the spring, yet another author claimed that Brown had stolen his premise from him.
Russian art historian Mikhail Anikin said he outlined his theory that Da Vinci's famous painting Mona Lisa was a coded theological message in his 2000 book Leonardo Da Vinci: Theology in Paint.
