"Leave my book alone." - Well, the controversy around the fictional book "The Da Vinci Code," by Dan Brown, is set to make some more controversy.
A new book coming out by Darrell L. Bock, PH. D., has gotten the attention of the publisher of Brown's book. Bock's book is titled "Breaking The Da Vinci Code" and is being published by Thomas Nelson. Thomas Nelson has now received a "cease-and-desist letter" from Random House who publishes Brown's famous fictional book because they view the title of the new book as "confusingly similar" to Brown's book.
Rob Johnson, a staff writer for Tennessean.com, writes:
Thomas Nelson filed its response Tuesday in the form of a federal complaint.
The Nashville publisher is asking a U.S. district judge in Nashville to declare that its publication of Breaking the Da Vinci Code does not violate Random House's rights or infringe on its trademark.
Thomas Nelson attorney John R. Jacobson contends in the complaint that his client has a First Amendment right to use the Da Vinci phrase in the title, that it has a right to publish a critique of Brown's book and that it can label the book as such.
Bock's book is apparently a critique of the Brown's book.
Bock's book isn't the only book coming out that critiques Brown's fictional book. Amy Welborn (open book), a fellow TypePad blogger, has a book coming out on April 1, 2004, titled, De-Coding Da Vinci.
Of her book, Welborn writes:
This book is intended to help you unpack all of this and to explore the truth behind The Da Vinci Code. We’ll look at Dan Brown’s sources, and see if they’re really trustworthy witnesses to history. We’ll ask if his characterization of early Christian writings, teaching and disputes – events that are widely documented and have been studied for hundreds of years by intelligent, open-minded people – are accurate. We’ll look at Jesus and Mary Magdalene – the people at the center of this novel – and see if anything at all The Da Vinci Code has to say about them is based on the historical record. And along the way, we’ll find a startling number of blatant, glaring errors on matters great and small that should send up big red flags to anyone reading the novel as a source of facts, rather than just pure fiction.
You know, there was a time that a publisher would like this kind of reaction to a popular book. After all, it means more dollars because people's curiosity gets tweaked, but I just have to wonder why Random House has taken this tact. Perhaps it's because they don't like truth.
I've not read Brown's book. And frankly I don't intend too because I recognized the falsehoods in the book when it first hit shelves. But I find this all very interesting as a hopeful writer.
