apologize or else
now then now then whats all this about - so dan brown lifted the idea for the da vinci code from someone else? amazing- if I had been plagiarised by such a poor writer, i wouldn't be drawing attention to the fact:-)
Note, more importantly, the basis for the post-structuralist framing of such books is that they are "true" - so basing it on other works is STANDARD PRACTICE - people that do research and expect people not to use their results need to learn what their trade is about - i cannot believe how someone could be so transparently greedy as to claim they had really come up with something that dan brown used to make lots of money - if they had such a good idea, how come their book didn't sell so well, eh? probably because it wasn't as readable - so why is his book worth a lot and theirs not? because the public vote with their purses. that doesn't mean much...
