PLEASE READ THESE FACTS FIRST:

  • Random House sued ME; not the other way around.
  • Random House filed suit to silence the facts I was posting on the web.
  • There has been NO trial on the facts, only the Random House effort to prevent a trial.
  • The only sworn statements made under penalty of perjury are affidavits from me and my experts, nothing from RH.
  • The judge refused to consider any expert analysis.
  • Despite suing me first, Random House & Sony UNsuccessfully demanded that I pay the $310,000 in legal fees they spent to sue me.
  • Contrary to the Random House spin, I am not alleging plagiarism of general issues, but of several hundred very specific ones.
  • This is not about money. Anything I win goes to charity.

Legal filings and the expert witness reports are HERE

I have a second blog, Writopia
which focuses on Dan Brown's pattern of falsehoods
and embellishment of his personal achievements.


Friday, August 05, 2005

Judge's Decision

The Judge's decision can be found in this .pdf

Neither my attorneys nor I have had time to completely dissect it, but in addition to the two errors mentioned in the previous blog post, there seem to be quite a number of errors of fact that could be made only by either ignoring the expert witness documents or by selectively choosing items to support the Random House case.

Stay tuned ... we're just getting warmed up.

14 Comments:

Blogger Mark said...

I'm sorry to hear this Lew. Maybe the Brown book will go through?

Fri Aug 05, 04:43:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Well, it does make the Dan Brown biography more of a possibility.

Even with the appeal, I would expect to have the book written and perhaps in print before things come to trial.

There are many errors in the decision and there seem to be fertile ground for appeal.

Fri Aug 05, 04:49:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Mark said...

I just read it and according to him, it's all scenes a faire, facts, unprotectable ideas and a focus on the dissimilarites, not the similarities. He even used Judge Hand. I have to say I find much of it credible. What's different? Enough if we are to believe this. Are the short chapterlets a key difference? The magdalene/jesus marriage and lineage? I always dwelt on that point from my objective analysis.

I'll be interested in the counterpoints.

I think under these circumstances, aside from the horrible problems of copyright law, documenting a pattern of deception by Brown is even more necessary than ever.

I'd be glad to help if asked.

Fri Aug 05, 06:13:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Thanks for the offer of help.

The key here is that the judge's opinion tracks the Random House briefs almost exactly -- that is, it seems written by someone who either forgot that I filed papers or deliberately ignored everything filed.

Analysis is ongoing.

Fri Aug 05, 07:28:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Christian said...

Honestly I hope an appeal case fail. The bar for a copyright infringement needs to be and should be high. Personally I think Dan Brown book should not be considered a copyright infringement even if the plot had been even more alike than it is. If you against all odds should prevail I think we are heading for a very dark age for writing where litigation become the primary task of publishing houses. Authors take ideas from eachother all the time and there are substantial similarities between a lot of books. The number of fantasy novells I read for instance which plot reminds me of Lord of the Rings is numerous.

I think what authors today often forget is that they do build upon what come before, taking ideas from books they read themselves over the years. And wether their books are successful or not do not depend so much on specific plot elements, but on wether they manage to write in an enganging manner. For instance Harry Potter have not become the success it is because JK Rowling came up with a very original idea, the number of books about child/apprentice wizards are numerous. It became a great success because JK Rowling wrote about it in a way that was fun and entertaining to her readers.

Dan's book didn't become the success it did because of the things that makes it similar to your book, if that was the secret sauce then your book would have been more successful than it was. It became the success it did because he wrote the story in a way that was accessible to a huge audience combined with building upon the readership his earlier books in the same series had created.

Fri Aug 05, 11:32:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Rob said...

I agree with Christian, and need to take it even one step further: this is all sour grapes on your part. Like Christian (and the judge) said, there are no new ideas, jsut expressions of those ideas. Had your book been as good as TDC, it would have been a huge hit and you would have made the millions of dollars you're trying to sue Dan Brown for. You should be ashamed of yourself. You are trying to do exactly what you've accused him of doing -- stealing. Grow up, get over yourself.

Sat Aug 06, 04:23:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Mark said...

The question is what is protected and what isn't? As for "series," only Angels & Demons is related to DVC. There is no question Brown borrowd thematics heavily, as all are present in Lew's books. The problem is he draped them in just enough new material to apparently get by with it. At least legally.

Sat Aug 06, 07:00:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Alex said...

Novelists put in long hours, agonize over minute details, and basically turn themselves into hermits for months on end to complete their mss. Their efforts and creativity need to be protected from those who would cut corners (or cut & paste) to get ahead.

Being inspired by someone's work is one thing - credit the author when you are. But to take a plot and "add a few details" to make it your own, well, that's theft.

I gave you a link on my last post, Perdue. My hope is that, even if you can't topple the giant, at least you can raise a little more awareness. Plagiarism should not pay.

Sat Aug 06, 09:42:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Thank you, Alex!

Sat Aug 06, 09:52:00 AM PDT  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have read your books and Dan Brown's books and your books are FAR superior. Dan Brown is a piece of crap who cannot write!!! The judge is an IDIOT!!! Dan Brown also plagerised from Lincoln and Baigent (Holy Blood, Holy Grail)!!!

Sat Aug 06, 09:53:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Bob said...

Dan Brown is neither a particularly good writer, nor particularly original, but he has made it big in the market.

Suing successful people seems to be the order of the day. J.K. Rowling was subject to the same treatment, as we all know, and successfully defended. She should not have had to.

Sat Aug 06, 11:10:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Bob: justice should work both ways. Just because a person is rich and famous does not give him/her the right to steal from others.

Sat Aug 06, 12:20:00 PM PDT  
Blogger douglas denoff said...

The legal system only benefits the guilty and stupid.

Someone told me 'you've gotta be really rich to afford to have principles'.

So take it from someone who's spend HUNDREDS of thousands on lawyers fighting proven crooks like William Morris, Qwest, and MCI KEEP your money for you and the kids. You can buy a LOTTA nice wine or a MUCH bigger sailboat with it and enjoying this short life goes a LONG >way towards easing the pain.

As long as you and the people you care about know the truth in your hearts, you can sleep at night. You're NEVER gonna make Dan Brown an honest man.

Sun Aug 07, 02:12:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Mark said...

Well Doug that isn't quite right even though ot may seem like it. The last quote is accurate based on the research Lew did, and I verfified, on Brown's background. Once you see a webpage copied verbatim and passed off as his own, plagiarism is an MO. I think it is based on the evidence I've seen already, however in law it's specificity that counts. He may have eluded the law on this, but not the truth.

The biography is more important now than ever. I do think the Code is different though even though it contains themes, concepts and the "expression" of Mr. Perdue. It takes it a step further with the use of the Baigent thesis as a foundation. Not plagiarism in that case. The idea of Jesus and MM with offspring is why DVC was the black swan that it became. That's the only reason and it's spelled out in that assertion. That's the Solomon Key.

Mon Aug 08, 07:35:00 PM PDT  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home