Passionate about IP! Since June 2003 the IPKat has covered copyright, patent, trade mark, designs, info-tech and confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and European perspective. Read, post comments and participate!

The team is Eleonora Rosati, Annsley Merelle Ward and Merpel. E-mail the Kats here!

The team is joined by GuestKats Kevin Bercimuelle-Chamot, Jocelyn Bosse, Alessandro Cerri, Anastasiia Kyrylenko, Marcel Pemsel and Anna Maria Stein.

SpecialKats: Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo (TechieKat), Antonios Baris (Book Review Editor), Rose Hughes (PatKat) and Chijioke Okorie (Africa Correspondent).

InternKats: Asude Sena Moya and Söğüt Atilla.
Home / / DA ANSWER?

DA ANSWER?

Mr Justice Peter Smith is due to give his judgment today in the Da Vinci Codes copyright case. The judgment is scheduled for some time after 2pm


The IPKat, who will bring you news as soon as he can, is still rather miffed that the protagonists allegedly took the Tube from Temple Underground Station to Kings College London...
DA ANSWER? DA ANSWER? Reviewed by Anonymous on Friday, April 07, 2006 Rating: 5

3 comments:

  1. John HFriday, 7 April 2006 at 14:41:00 GMT+1

    Well, Dan Brown won - quelle surprise - but I'd be interested to know what views the IPKat has on the judgment. Not had a look at it in any detail but the BBC report seems to suggest the judge's grounds for rejecting the Holy Blood authors' contention that Dan Brown had copied their "central theme" was that the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail "did not have a central theme", but instead the alleged theme was "an artificial creation for the purposes of the litigation working back from the Da Vinci Code".

    But does that mean the judge was leaving the door open for saying that copyright could protect a "central theme" where a copyright work actually possessed such a feature?

    ReplyDelete
  2. John HFriday, 7 April 2006 at 14:43:00 GMT+1

    Oops, forgot link to the BBC report. Here it is now.

    I also enjoyed Dan Brown's comment that the result showed his opponents' claim "was utterly without merit". Far be it from me to make any comment about people who live in glass houses...

    ReplyDelete
  3. JeremyFriday, 7 April 2006 at 16:46:00 GMT+1

    Nice one, John!

    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

Subscribe to: Post Comments ( Atom )
Powered by Blogger.