DA VINCI CODE - THE SECOND COMING



The Times reports that Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh were today in the Court of Appeal, appealing against Peter Smith J’s decision that Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code did not infringe their copyright in Holy Blood and Holy Grail. They are arguing that the trial judge was wrong to focus so heavily on the central theme of their book, which he ultimately decided was constructed for the purpose of the case. Counsel for the appellants said that “the theme appropriated by Brown and used in the Da Vinci Code was a substantial part of the appellant’s [Mr Baigent and Mr Leigh’s] copyright" was still valid, and that
“[w]hen the law is properly interpreted and is applied to the learned judge’s findings of fact, the only proper conclusion is that the defendant has infringed the appellant’s copyright."
A quick look at the court list reveals that the case is up before Mummery, Rix and Lloyd LJJ.

The IPKat would love to see some much-needed clarity on non-literal copying. Will their Lordships comment on the permissibility of inserting secret codes into judgments, Merpel wonders.
DA VINCI CODE - THE SECOND COMING DA VINCI CODE - THE SECOND COMING Reviewed by Unknown on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. I often find the more trivial aspects of your blog rather annoying, especially all the silly and usually irrelevant illustrations. That's why I'm writing to say I really liked the Da Vinci cat picture. Still laughing :)

    ReplyDelete

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.