• 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.
  • NO expert testimony was allowed despite three international plagiarism experts who were willing to testif that it existed.
  • 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.

Wednesday, September 20, 2006

Random House Attorney's Fee Demand -- My Prayers Answered

U.S. District Court Judge Daniels has ruled that I do _not_ have to pay the $310,000+ that Random House spent in legal fees to sue me.

Judge Daniels ruled that, "...Perdue's claim was not objectively unreasonable, and there was no evidence that Perdue pursued his claims with an improper motive and/or in bad faith. " -- page 2, line 8 of Daniel's Order .

The magistrate's report on which Daniels based his decision is far more detailed and spends a fair amount of time to support his opinion that I was _not_ the money-grubbing, gold-digging opportunist that Random House claimed in its legal papers and which Dan Brown publicly alleged on the Today Show.

The magistrate's report is here.

These two documents also do a very thorough job of describing the circumstances of the litigation that Random House started.

My petition for a writ of certiorari still remains for consideration before the Supreme Court.


Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Well actually, the insults and innuendo in the Random House legal filings would be libel (written defamation) while Dan's statements on the Today Show would be slander (spoken defamation).

(Actually TV is a little in between since the spoken defamation is recorded.)

Regardless, you can lie as much as you want and defame someone to your heart's content in a legal filing because whatever you say is protected, true or not.

Thus Random House's courtroom defamation of me, even if based on knowing distortions and misrepresentations, is not something one could successfully bring legal action over.

Wed Sep 20, 04:39:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Mark said...

Good deal. Glad you got out from under that yoke. Considering it was Daniels it's suprising, but it's a question of looking close enough this time. Onward.

Wed Sep 20, 05:22:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Mr. Serf: You make some interesting points.

Mark: thank you for your support. I predict that the "kept media" will write nothing of this because they are so totally in Random House's well-stuffed pocketbook.

Thu Sep 21, 07:01:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Mark said...

Their forte is winning a all costs and spectacular failure i.e. fall from grace. Breaking even isn't even on the radar.

Sat Sep 23, 09:19:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Mark: It has now been pointed out to me a number of times that RH and Brown have made unprotected defamatory statements about me.

Sun Sep 24, 09:55:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Mark said...

Good. Hopefully you can call them on it. I was particularly interested in C.E. Petit's commentary at Lee's blog. He represents the sci-fi writers association. None of those authors thinks, or have ever thought you had a case. I found that strange frankly. Most of them are TOR authors and I told you what Teresa Nielsen Hayden of TOR said about you. I've consulted with Petit on my case and he declined. Didn't have the guts is more like it. It's a clique over there.

Sun Sep 24, 09:08:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Those who are most ignorant about a concept are all too frequently the ones who speak up soonest and loudest

Mon Sep 25, 06:44:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Mark said...

He seems to be on your side here, but with lawyers one can never be sure. There are always caveats galore.

Mon Sep 25, 11:41:00 AM PDT  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Thanks for the link ... he seems pretty straightforward and factual without taking sides ...

It is nice to see someone basing their writing on the facts as opposed to a Random House publicity handout that the MSM suck down uncritically.

Mon Sep 25, 12:42:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Mark said...

I don't understand Patry's comment that you should have had to pay the fees? Why? It's obvious he doesn't think you have a case, but I've never read his factual argument to my satisfaction. What does he base it on?

As an aside I've burned your novel PK narrative onto CD's and intend to play it in my Jeep driving around spraying the streets for mosquitoes tommorrow. If there was ever a job made to order for books on "tape" this is it. I'm a vector control agent here in LA.

Tue Sep 26, 07:40:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Patry, I think, is one of those who makes a decision without having been bothered by the facts. At least in this case.

Wish I had more demand for PK audio ... I'd finish it, but ... enjoy!

Tue Sep 26, 07:50:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Mark said...

I hear you. You did a good job, but I'm having burning issues with my CD-writer. It won't let me overwrite or add the new files/

Wed Sep 27, 12:48:00 PM PDT  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Thanks, Art. Yes, I continue to get emails and other comments about the similarities.

But more importantly, I'm very happy you've enjoyed my work. That's what counts!

Thu Sep 28, 06:39:00 AM PDT  

Post a Comment

<< Home