'Da Vinci' author fends off copyright claim

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to revive a lawsuit that accused author Dan Brown of stealing ideas for his best-selling novel "The Da Vinci Code."

The justices let stand a lower court ruling that author Lewis Perdue didn't show that "The Da Vinci Code," published in 2003, was substantially similar to his 2000 book, "Daughter of God."

"The Da Vinci Code" has sold about 40 million copies worldwide. The thriller links artist Leonardo da Vinci to a centuries-old coverup by the Roman Catholic Church of the supposed marriage of Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene. A film version starring Tom Hanks premiered early this year.

"Brown took substantial elements of Perdue's novel, appropriated them as his own, and profited greatly from doing so," said Perdue's appeal, which was rejected without comment by the high court in Washington.

Brown's lawyers countered that the novels' "plots, characters, themes and total concept and feel were radically different."

Perdue's suit, seeking $150 million in damages, also named the publisher of Brown's book, Bertelsmann AG's Random House unit, and the producer of the movie, Columbia Pictures, a unit of Tokyo-based Sony Corp.

Perdue claimed that Brown took plot and character details from "Daughter of God." He submitted sworn statements from a linguist and a university English professor who cited specific instances of similarity.

A federal judge in New York granted judgment to Brown, saying the only similarities between the books involved historical facts and abstract themes. The New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed.

In appealing to the Supreme Court, Perdue argued that federal appeals courts disagree on whether to allow expert testimony on such questions of similarity, and that the similarities cited by his experts were enough to warrant a trial on his claims.

In April, Brown won a court ruling in London rejecting a separate lawsuit that claimed he stole the plot of "The Da Vinci Code" from the non-fiction book "The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail," written by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh and published in 1982. Baigent and Leigh are appealing that decision.

The case is Perdue v. Brown, 06-213.