Not necessarily. If you write a completely factual essay and don't acknowledge your sources then you are guilty of plagiarism. I imagine it is the same for a novel with truthful bits in...
The guy's dead anyway ... ;)
Rumor has it that there will be an out-of-court settlement involving the eyes of the Oracle.
I think they're suing him for making fun of them and their now dead co-author as fictional characters. It's a fairly sketchy case to my mind, but the publicity will be fantastic. I finished re-reading Foucault's Pendulum the other day, and it is as brilliant as ever.
I wonder if they'll rerelease those Robert Anton Wilson books with the Priory of Sion and the Merovingian bloodline of Jesus. Did he ever get around to writing the third or fourth one?
The Third one got published I think (the one set in America), but as was discussed on Psychoceramics some time back all the publishers kept mysteriously going bust.... Happy New Year BTW.
You'd think that now someone would rush out a new edition, with obligatory Dan Brown comparisons on the cover.
Given that "The DaVinci Code" is a bunch of fictitious crap trying to pass itself off as history, I would say that the orginal authors have a legitimate beef.
I was under the impression that /The DaVinci Code/ is a bunch of fictitious crap trying to pass itself off as... fiction?
>>I was under the impression that /The DaVinci Code/ is a bunch of fictitious crap trying to pass itself off as... fiction?
Well yes, you know that, I know that, but there are millions of lamers who think it's the truth......
Unfortunately some of my in-laws fall into that category, which surprises me not one bit ;)
You're probably right, although interpretation and analysis of facts is likely to be a different matter.