Friday, May 06, 2005

Check For a New Posts on Da Vinci Crock

I've posted an update on Da Vinci Crock (and will follow with more) on the court hearing and the fact that the Random House lawyers have been called on their questionable behavior.

I'm primed for the fights here, folks.

If I don't get a jury trial at this level, we will appeal. That is something that you can take to the bank. I will not stop until I'm either dead or get justice. I don't go away. My wife and I have talked about what happens if Random House bankrupts us with this. We know that is a risk and she's right there with me.

Bankrupt or not, nothing that Random House can do will prevent me from publishing facts that are provably true in a court of law: facts about the plagiarism, facts about Dan Brown or facts about the behavior of the Random House lawyers.

We've had crackers try to bring down the site and Random House shills posting on this and other blogs.

Because of the danger of losing the posts through cracking the site or other means, I upload a daily archive of everything to 11 friends in four countries. If Da Vinci Crock goes dark here, it lights up other places.

There is a lot more to say about Dan Brown, his "extensive research" and other issues connected with The Da Vinci Code.

The truth will come out.


Blogger Mark said...

Well I hope you don't have to go bankrupt Lew, but at least you have big time representation on contingency now. That ain't bad when taking on Bertlesman.

Friday, May 06, 2005 7:16:00 PM  
Blogger Mark said...

Those are two avoidable mistakes. If you can't get the name of law firm correct, jeez. He didn't quote your lawyer either.

Saturday, May 07, 2005 9:03:00 AM  
Blogger Stef said...

Mmmm, hacking your blog ... that's a very good sign isn't it?

Smart move with the two blog strategy

Sunday, May 08, 2005 7:24:00 AM  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Thanks ... Google may have fixed the exploit.

When I get time, I am going to re-organize the blog posts into a static web-page that puts the various topics in categories: lawyer misbehavior, inconsistencies in the Random House argument ... that sort of thing.

This blog will be more opinion-oriented while the Crock will try to stick to facts with a little opinion as I can reasonably muster.

This blog will (as you see) allow comments.

Sunday, May 08, 2005 8:32:00 AM  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Uh ... I need an email address.

Sunday, May 08, 2005 10:00:00 AM  
Blogger Mark said...

He definitely had access since they were published. It seems impossible with that amount of substantial similarities that he coudn't have read them. Angels& Demons supports it had started earlier.

Sunday, May 08, 2005 12:11:00 PM  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

It certainly seems that way. It's also very, very curious that they are unwilling to have him testify under oath as I have done.

Sunday, May 08, 2005 7:08:00 PM  
Blogger Mark said...

I'm sure he'd testify to writing the Code, but reading your books a priori would be a bit of a problem I'd say.

Sunday, May 08, 2005 8:01:00 PM  
Blogger Ray Girvan said...

re-organize the blog posts

Good move. For those encountering this story mid-stream, the online material (two blogs, multiple web pages) is a trifle confusing - it'd help for all your sites to have a clear intro at the top saying what this is about.

Monday, May 09, 2005 5:58:00 AM  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

At some point, a full reorganization will be needed. For now, I've added relevant links and some explanation to the top of DVCrock which, I hope, will make things a bit easier to comprehend.

Monday, May 09, 2005 8:12:00 AM  
Blogger Jocelyn Smith said...

I've just spent an hour and a half perusing your various complaints and filings. Very interesting stuff. Will we get more detail on Friday's hearing and the various rulings as they come in? I'd be really interested to see any rulings or opinions on some of the previous motions for summary judgment etc, just to see what the judges are thinking thus far.

Monday, May 09, 2005 9:00:00 PM  
Blogger Lewis Perdue said...

Jocelyn: I'll make a couple of other posts re: court, but there's little more that will happen until the Judge makes his decision.

By every standard I can find, he seems like a fair, highly-intelligent judge determined to do the right thing.

Problem is that copyright infringement law in the U.S. has no real standards...the judicial precedents vary greatly from one appeals court to the other.

Tuesday, May 10, 2005 8:03:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home