Dan Brown Wins Da Vinci Code Court Case

What happens when you go up against the creator of Robert Langdon? You get slapped with a $6 million legal bill. Authors Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh found that out the hard way. Britain’s Court of Appeal rejected their lawsuit on Wednesday, which claimed novelist Dan Brown stole from their book “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail.” The nonfiction book dealt with the theory that Jesus had a child with wife Mary Magdalene. Brown’s novel, “The Da Vinci Code,” sold more than 40 million copies since its 2003 release. There was also a movie adaptation, starring actor Tom Hanks, which grossed over $217 million during its 2006 release.

The court case was against Brown’s publisher Random House Inc., but the author was the one who was really on trial, spending several days in 2006 giving testimony. Brown admitted to having studied from the 1982 nonfiction book. A judge said that the copyright law did not protect themes, facts, or theories. Baigent and Leigh’s lawyers said, the authors “expended a vast amount of skill and labor… That skill and labor is protectable.”

The question still remains of what role Dan Brown’s wife played in this. She was responsible for most of the research, but did not testify in court. The bestselling author wanted to protect his wife from the publicity.

Lord Justice Bernard Rix said Dan Brown acknowledged use of the work. “That is not the mark of an author who thought that he was making illegitimate use of the fruits of someone else’s literary labors, but of one who intended to acknowledge a debt of ideas, which he has gone on to express in his own way and for his own purposes.” He added that the character of Leigh Teabing was an anagram of Leigh and Baigent. The Da Vinci character specifically states that “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail” is “the best-known tome” on the subject.