Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Noted in passing

Slate on ancestry. I agree. (Though it's a bit sad to print a serious article like this purely in the slipstream of the ludicrous Da Vinci Code court case.)



( 7 comments — Leave a comment )
Mar. 18th, 2006 04:16 pm (UTC)
What is ludicrous about the case? I know several people who suggested that Dan Brown had ripped off Holy Blood, Holy Grail before the case came to court.

(I havent read either myself...)
Mar. 18th, 2006 04:23 pm (UTC)
Well, either The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail is a serious history book, in which case its statements are matters of historical fact, which can hardly be copyrighted; or else it's fiction, in which case it shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone - ie I suspect Baigent and Lee only stand a chance of winning if they admit that their own book is a load of rubbish. swisstone had a longer entry along the same lines here.
Mar. 19th, 2006 02:33 pm (UTC)
Didn't the fellow who supplied those two with the info they used in 'Holy blood' recently admitted he invented most of it?
Mar. 18th, 2006 04:47 pm (UTC)
Yes, everyone is related to everyone. The sooner we get used to it the better.

it's one of my misgivings about fantasy, that it almost always features 'races' of humanoids. I sort of think it panders to a part of us that wants people to be ridgidly divided into predictable types.

Er... a bit like my fascination with personality theory now I think of it

Mar. 18th, 2006 09:52 pm (UTC)
cost-benefit analysis
Has anyone got the figures on the costs/benefits the two parties are experiencing from the publicity and the court case. I believe Holy Blood Holy Grail has had a renewed boost to its sales. Maybe I'm just an old cynic. Is it likely there will be an undisclosed settlement before the court costs get too big?

By the way, hats off to Dan Brown for making so much with so little. It reminded me of The Blair Witch. Create hype and watch the money roll in.
Mar. 18th, 2006 10:58 pm (UTC)
What's ridiculous about the HBHG/Dan Brown case is that copyright doesn't protect ideas, only the expression of ideas.
In other words, if I were to write a tightly-paced thriller, featuring an American academic pursued by blood-chilling religious maniacs through the finely described centres of European culture, solving mind-bending cryptograms which lead him (and the reader) to deep insights into our spiritual inheritance, then Dan Brown wouldn't be able to sue me for copyright.
But if I wrote a trashy doorstop recycling bogus HBHG conspiracy theories, with cardboard morons following hackneyed plot lines to an ending unmatched in dullness, then I should watch out for a call from his lawyers.
Mar. 19th, 2006 12:18 pm (UTC)
I love that court case. Especially as the name of the villain in the Da Vinci Code is based on the names of two of the three writers of Holy Blood, Holy Grail.
( 7 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

June 2019


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by yoksel