DA VINCI CODE IDEAS NOT STOLEN

A British judge has cleared Da Vinci Code author Dan Brown of stealing ideas for his bestseller:

In issuing his opinion, Justice Peter Smith said Mr. Brown had indeed relied on the earlier work, "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail," in writing a section of "The Da Vinci Code." But he said two of the authors of "Holy Blood," Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, had failed in their effort to prove that Mr. Brown had stolen their "central theme" because they could not accurately state what that theme was.

In fact, Justice Smith said, in a ruling that was at times sharply critical of the plaintiffs — as well as of Mr. Brown and his wife, Blythe, who does much of his research — the earlier book "does not have a central theme as contended by the claimants: it was an artificial creation for the purposes of the litigation working back from 'The Da Vinci Code.' "

Mr. Baigent and Mr. Leigh sued Random House U.K. (which is also their publisher), claiming that "The Da Vinci Code" had stolen the "architecture" of their book — the steps they took to reach their conclusions — and thus was guilty of copyright infringement. (The book's third author, Henry Lincoln, did not take part in the suit.) "It would be quite wrong if fictional writers were to have their writings pored over in the way 'The Da Vinci Code' has been pored over in this case by authors of pretend historical books to make an allegation of infringement of copyright," Justice Smith wrote in his decision.

Ah, the line "authors of pretend historical books" makes the whole suit worth it.