Dan: Just "Reworking" Not Plagiarizing?
As a university faculty member, I frequently gave an "F" to unoriginal and desperate college students who diligently to altered what they copied in hopes that the copying would not be discovered.
London shows clearly why Random House is so desperate to keep my issues from coming to trial, why they had to sue me to shut me up and why they would not let Dan testify under oath here.
By JILL LAWLESS,
Associated Press Writer
Wed Mar 15, 12:25 PM ET
LONDON - Dan Brown returned to the witness stand Wednesday and acknowledged "reworking" passages from an earlier book for his best-selling novel "The Da Vinci Code," but he firmly rejected charges that he ripped off key ideas for his conspiracy thriller.
Brown said "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail" was "one of the books in the mix" when he and his wife, Blythe Brown, were researching the novel.
He acknowledged "reworking" passages from the earlier book.
"That's how you incorporate research into a novel," Brown said.
No, Dan. That's NOT how you incorporate research, at least not ethically, anyway.
Steal a little here, steal a little there. Alter the little pieces of fabric to hide the source, then stitch them together and produce a totally derivative and unoriginal patchwork quilt that you call your own and hope that no one notices the copying ... or that you have skirted the legalities.