Estimated read time: 3-4 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
Suspense was riding high Friday as a judge in London prepared to deliver his verdict in a sensational lawsuit in which US author Dan Brown stands accused of lifting parts of another novel to write his global best-seller "The Da Vinci Code".
If High Court Justice Peter Smith finds that Brown's book infringed the copyright of "The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail," sales of the bestseller in Britain -- and release of its film version -- could be halted.
The ruling was expected at 2:00 p.m. (1300 GMT), court officials said.
Brown is accused of lifting key elements from "The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail", itself a top-selling book published in 1982, to pen his 2003 novel which has sold more than 30 million copies worldwide.
Both books explore the idea that Jesus Christ married Mary Magdalene, had children together, and that their descendants have survived up to the present day.
It is one of the most high-profile cases to take place at the Royal Courts of Justice in central London, attracting the world's media and public who lined up outside the courthouse each day to hear the latest of the legal drama.
An employee at the court told AFP it was such a big case "apparently because it's exciting" but declined to comment on whether staff were discussing how the judge would rule.
The authors of the earlier work, Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, are claiming damages against Random House -- the publisher of both books.
Random House provided no immediate comment to the media about the suspense inside as it fielded many calls from the media.
Brown has attended and given evidence at the hearing, which opened on February 27.
Jonathan Rayner James, lawyer for Baigent and Leigh, has argued that Brown's evidence denying he had copied material from their book should be viewed with "deep suspicion".
The US author has claimed he had not read the other book until a late stage in the production of "The Da Vinci Code".
Brown, however, has admitted that much of the research for the novel was carried out by his wife, Blythe, who did not appear in court.
"The evidence of Blythe Brown was of fundamental importance to this case," said James.
"It was crucial in revealing the dependency on 'The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail' and the extent to which she relied upon it. Perhaps that explains why she was not produced," he said.
Brown has said he did not want his wife involved because she did not like the glare of publicity.
He has rejected as "completely fanciful" that he stole ideas for his book.
If the two writers win their case and opt to take injunctions stopping use of their material, it could threaten the May 19 British release of the film adaptation of the novel, starring Tom Hanks and Sir Ian McKellen.
And, with such a victory, judge Smith has already asked the hypothetical question: "Will they want me to give back my copy of 'The Da Vinci Code'?"
lc/rom/kjm
AFPEntertainment-Britain-US-books-court-DaVinci
AFP 071015 GMT 04 06
COPYRIGHT 2004 Agence France-Presse. All rights reserved.
