Senior research worker of “Ermitazh” Mikhail Anikin has brought  an action against the author of “The Da Vinci Code”. Russian art critic Anikin blames an American writer for plagiarism and theft of his scientific working and discoveries. According to his words, Dan Brown illegally used his ideas while writing at least three books that became best-sellers. Yesterday the art critic arrived from Moscow to St. Petersburg to file a petition with the General Office of Public Prosecutor of Russia. He demands to prohibit distribution of the book and showing of the movie “The Da Vinci Code” in the country. From judicial authorities of the USA he demands Brown’s bringing to account. The scientist also expects to get money damages  for  moral damage as well.
Having read “The Da Vinci Code” Anikin was terrified: “All my ideas without my permission were used in Brown’s publications”. According to Anikin, he was the first who guessed a riddle of “Jokonda”, even the title “The Da Vinci Code” was invented by the Russian scientist in 1987.
Anikin proved that Leonardo da Vinci created a coded allegory of Christian church, collective image of male and female. To prove his theory Russian art critic used fundamental scientific methods, archives of the very Leonardo and even X-ray. He divided relatively the portrait into 2 vertical parts and saw 2 different images. “I guessed this riddle in 1986. It was proclaimed on the 14^th of October in 1987 at the meeting of European art history department of the Hermitage”, says Anikin. At that time, according to Anikin, the  concept and phrase “the Da Vinci code” was born. In this way opponents of the scientist named his invention. That’s why Anikin is sure that there won’t be any problems with witnesses. In atheistic Soviet Union it was decided not to cover this invention broadly, there were published only several articles in scientific magazines and one brief article in a provincial newspaper.
“It was in August, 1998 in the Hermitage in time of exhibition which was visited by a delegation from the USA. I was communicating with them almost every day during 2 weeks”, says the art critic. According to his words, the closest relations he had with one colleague, designer and photographer William Sten. “He seemed to be an honest and cultured person who found my discovery interesting”, remembers Anikin. Sten was making many notes while listening to Russian colleague. Sten was delighted with his ideas, and then he asked for permission to retell them to his friend, journalist… Dan Brown. Flattered Anikin agreed. However Anikin put forward a condition: if his ideas are used in any way, it is necessary to point out primary source.
The story was forgotten. In 2000 Anikin wrote a book, not fiction but popular scientific – “Leonardo Da Vinci ili bogosloviye v kraskakh”. In this book Anikin stated his theory. The book was published in a small edition.
    In his petition to the General Office of Public Prosecutor of Russia and judicial authorities of the USA Anikin writes that appearance the  of “The Da Vinci Code” in 2003 would be impossible without using the whole complex of ideas expressed in his monograph. According to Anikin, content of Brown’s fashionable but doubtful best-seller caused deep moral and financial damage to him as some of his ideas were misinterpreted in a wrong way. All the necessary evidences are in my publications that were issued in Russia earlier than Dan Brown’s “The Da Vinci Code”.
    Anikin asks the General Office of Public Prosecutor to prohibit distribution of the book and showing of the movie “The Da Vinci Code” and to oblige Russian distributor to pay him compensation at the rate of all fees that Brown must get from Russian sales. From judicial authorities of the USA Anikin demands bringing to account of the author of a scandal best-seller for plagiarism and oblige him to apologize. Sum of compensation from the very Brown is not determined yet. But Anikin believes it must be equivalent to the sum of all Brown’s fees received for “The Da Vinci Code”.
 
This is not the end of the story. Anikin confessed to a correspondent of “Izvestiya” that Brown (without asking) borrowed from him other scientific conclusions. For other stolen ideas such as “Digital fortress” and “Angels and Demons” (Dan Brown’s novels) Anikin is not going to bring an action. “I will only announce that Mr. Brown deceived me and I’ll prove it three times”, says Anikin.
“In a suit with Dan Brown Anikin has no chances”, claims Irina Tulubyeva, manager and partner of the law group “Tulubyeva, Osipov and partners”, specialized in defense of intellectual property, “the matter is that copyright doesn’t preserve ideas, methods and conceptions. In cases with writing not content can be contested but form. In other words, the Court will compare two texts word for word. There is a sense at law only if in the novel “The DA Vinci Code” there are pieces that word in word repeat parts from Anikin’s book. I hesitate that they will be found. In addition, Anikin will have to be at law with Dan Brown on the territory of the USA and use services of American lawyers. These are vast expenses.”
Elena Rotkevich, St. Petersburg
http://www.inauka.ru/mifs/article64382.html
Reported By Tanya Golenishcheva  of Kline Preston Law Group, P.C. in Kiev
 

This entry was posted on Friday, July 7th, 2006 at 5:51 pm and is filed under Uncategorized, Current Events, Russia. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.