'Da Vinci Code' Copyright Suit Called 'Absurd,' Gets Tossed

A federal judge has granted summary judgment against a Massachusetts writer who claimed that the 2003 blockbuster novel "The Da Vinci Code" infringed his book "The Vatican Boys."

John Dunn, of Holyoke, was seeking more than $400 million in damages from "Da Vinci Code" author Dan Brown, publisher Random House and the three movie studios that distributed the 2006 film based on the worldwide bestseller.

But in his order granting the defendants' motion for summary judgment, Judge Michael A. Posner of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts described Dunn's assertions as "absurd" and "patently ridiculous."

Dunn delineated what he said were numerous similarities between his 1997 novel and "The Da Vinci Code." For instance, his comparison of the books sets forth likeness of themes and thematic expression, characters, setting, storyline, plot points, and total concept.

In their motion seeking dismissal or summary judgment, the defendants said they never saw Dunn's book before "The Da Vinci Code" was published and that the two works are distinctly different.

Even assuming they had access to "The Vatican Boys," they said, it is different from Brown's book in numerous, significant ways.

"The Da Vinci Code" is an "erudite exploration of art and the history of the 'divine feminine,'" while "The Vatican Boys" is a religious thriller based on a massive banking fraud, according to the defendants.

Judge Posner agreed with them. He noted the differences in many of the key characters, describing Dunn's attempt to liken the two central female characters as "absurd" and the villain in "The Da Vinci Code" with a character in Dunn's book as "patently ridiculous."

"Far from being similar the characters, plot devices, settings, pacing, tone and the theme of the two books are entirely different," the judge said in dismissing the case.

To comment, ask questions or contribute articles, contact West.Andrews.Editor@Thomson.com.