header-logo header-logo

Da Vinci Code appeal is dismissed

13 April 2007
Issue: 7268 / Categories: Legal News , Media , Data protection , Intellectual property
printer mail-detail

Dan Brown, author of The Da Vinci Code, did not reproduce ideas from an earlier work in his best-selling novel, the Court of Appeal has ruled in Baigent v Random House Group.

The appeal court knocked back claims by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh that themes from their book, The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail (HBHG), were plagiarised by Brown. The pair now face a legal bill of £3m.

A line had to be drawn between the legitimate use of ideas expressed and the unlawful copying of their expression, the court said. In this case, The Da Vinci Code fell the right side of the line and thus there had not been unlawful copying of the expression of the claimants’ ideas as set out in HBHG.

Carl Steele, a solicitor at Ashfords, says the case highlights the difficulty of succeeding with a claim for non-textual copyright infringement.

“The Court of Appeal has reaffirmed the well established principle that copyright does not subsist in ideas per se; it only protects the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll