Misleading Reference Insults The Search for Truth
They MIS-use footnote 1 at the bottom of the page to imply that Gary Goshgarian's Declaration supports their false contention that any similarities are isolated.
Far from it. Professor Goshgarian's declaration was included to show that many of the items that Random House was claiming as "typical" of a thriller or a "scene a faire" were NOT, indeed, what RH claimed.
FURTHER, they try to shoe-horn Olsson's comments into the mix to further try and imply that Olsson supports the RH distortions.
Goshgarian's analysis, like that from John Olsson, was a very quick and preliminary one which will be greatly expanded by them and other experts IF this matter is allowed to go to trial as it should.
Why does Random House so fear an open trial that they would mislead the reader of their brief? Are they hoping people won't read farther? The judge in this case will certainly read everything.
Aren't we looking for the truth here?