I plan to read Dan Brown’s The DaVinci Code as soon as one my friends can remember where he last put it. (No hurry, Steve. I already have too many titles on my bookshelf.) I have read (one of) its rebuttal(s), Cracking DaVinci’s Code: You’ve Read the Fiction, Now Read the Facts, by James L. Garlow and Peter Jones.
Imagine my surprise to read that The DaVinci Code may be a work of plagiarism. Lewis Perdue, author of Da Vinci Legacy and Daughter of God, among many other books, is embroiled in a copyright suit with Dan Brown and Random House, Inc.
You can read about it on Perdue’s web sites or blog.
Looks like Perdue’s taking this one to the court of public opinion.
I'm Brent Logan and I've been here since 2004, writing about family, food, and fun. You can contact me at 
Many thanks for mentioning The Da Vinci Crock blog.
Random House and its parent company, Bertelsmann want very much to silence me. They are trying every sleazy tactic to keep this from going to trial.
The Da Vinci Crock Blog (http://davincicrock.blogspot) highlights many clearly documented instances (verified using mostly other filings in the case) where Random House lawyers have deliberately written things falsely to make it appear that I agree with one of their points (when I don’t), that I have not contested something (when I have), that I have said something or done something that I have not.
As you’ll read on the blog, the Random House actions suggest that, perhaps Dan Brown did not conduct his “extensive” research or actually write The Da Vinci Code.
I haven’t read “The Davinci Code,” but according to the articles I’ve read about it in the Bible Review magazine, it is historically inaccurate regarding early Church history, theologically weak at best, and highly speculative regarding the relationship between Mary Magdalene and Jesus. If I remember my Bible correctly, Jesus was close to MM; she was the first one to find the empty tomb, and the only person who stayed at the crucifixion to the bitter end. There is some speculation that she came from a wealthy family, and bankrolled Jesus and the Twelve Diciples during their wanderings and preaching. There is no evidence that she was the prostitute named Mary that was forgiven by Jesus. There are many Mary’s in the Bible, including Mary the Mother of Jesus. Tradition is weak in the assumption that the prostitute at the well and MM are one in the same.
The Christain Church grew out of the anti-Roman/paganism backlash that was mostly an underground affair, up until Jesus taking is ‘public,’ at great cost to himself and his followers. Until Constantine made Christianity ‘respectable,’ Christians were definitely outsiders. As an aside, Constantine didn’t actually convert until he was on his deathbed. Up until then, he preferred to live his life in a very libertine manner. His conversion took place only when he was reasonably certain that his days of debauchery were at an end, anyway. That’s doin’t it the easy way, I suppose, but out of that deathbed conversion came the ascendency of the Church.
Early Church history is a very interesting topic. I won’t bore you with more details. But, The Da Vinci Code does not do it justice. There are many books in print that do a much better job of getting it right. I recommend a search for them on Amazon.com, rather than wasting one’s time reading The Da Vinci Code.
Interestingly, one might one conclude that Dan Brown may not have written The Da Vinci Code
Why?
Well, for one thing, Random House would not allow him to file an affidavit to that effect in the copyright infringement case concerning Code’s plagiarism of my novels.
My attorneys (http://www.cozen.com) raised these issues in our April 8 legal filings in U.S. District Court, Southern District of NY. An affidavit like that is an easy no-brainer.
Yet, their failure to do so basically means that they are admitting defeat on huge amounts of their previous arguments.
Their filings have basically provided no legal basis to conclude that he did, or did not write The Da Vinci Code, nor that he did or did not do the well-publicized “extensive” research.
Similarly, the failure to file that affidavit means he was not willing, under oath, to state that he never heard of me or my books which were systematically looted for Code.
Why are they keeping Dan Brown from saying those things under oath?
All the legal filings are at: http://www.davincilegacy.com/Infringement/
and the documentation of some ethically borderline tactics by the Random House attorneys at: http://davincicrock.blogspot.com/
Lewis, you are one mad dog of a client and I don’t mean that in a bad way. :-D Your lawyer must either love you or hate you; there can be no middle ground.
Random House, on the other hand, I’m sure they just hate you.
I added your blog to my RSS reader list.
Well, my lawyers (http://www.cozen.com) seem to find some value in the blog posts.
I’ve tried to go over the latest Random House filing and to find the contradictions and inaccuracies … that seems to make a contribution.
I am sure that RH hates me … but then I’d have to expect that.
Thank you for adding Da Vinci Crock to your RSS … I think the only way I am going to get a fair hearing is for people to shine a light under the rock.
[blogan: I deleted your two later identical posts. My web hosting service has been extremely flakey recently; I suspect you never received confirmation the comment was received...]
Yeah, when I hit the “submit comment” report nothing happened.
Then shortly after that, the whole blog was unavailable. So OI came back later and re-posted.
This happens more frequently to most blogs … which is why I cut and paste stuff into wordpad until it either “takes” or needs another take.
Yeah, when I hit the “submit comment” report nothing happened.
Then shortly after that, the whole blog was unavailable. So I came back later and re-posted.
This happens more frequently to most blogs … which is why I cut and paste stuff into wordpad until it either “takes” or needs another take.
DANG!!!!!
It happened again!
Lewis, normally my blog is fairly responsive. My web host appears to be fighting a spammer that is slowing it down.
I was going to delete your second post, but without it, your third message would look out of place. :-)
Please bear with me. This should get better.