Da Vinci Code case a "storm in teacup" -witness

LONDON, Mar 15 (Reuters) The historians suing ''The Da Vinci Code'' author Dan Brown's publisher for copyright infringement ''were in danger of making fools of themselves'', a witness said today.

Literary agent Patrick Janson-Smith, formerly publisher both to Brown and claimants Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, also said it was the prospect of the best-seller being made into a movie that had prompted the case.

''I didn't think Baigent and Leigh had a leg to stand on and that they were in danger of making fools of themselves,'' Janson-Smith said in a witness statement, referring to 2004, when the historians' agent said they intended to take action.

''I thought the legal case was all a storm in a teacup.'' Baigent and Leigh wrote a 1982 book ''The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail'' which they claim Brown lifted wholesale for his novel.

''While I saw similarities between The Da Vinci Code and The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, I never thought there was a copying issue to deal with,'' Janson-Smith said.

The books, both published by Random House, share the idea of Jesus marrying and having a child by Mary Magdalene and their bloodline being protected by the mysterious Priory of Sion.

Brown admits that Holy Blood was one of several sources for his research, and even names a character after the two historians who are taking his British publisher to court.

But Random House's lawyers point to significant differences between the work of historical conjecture and the novel, and say Brown did not know about Holy Blood when he first came up with his idea for The Da Vinci Code.

HOLLYWOOD FILM Janson-Smith said he believed it was plans for a Hollywood adaptation of the novel that explained why the case had come to court in the first place.

''They were most especially concerned that a film of The Da Vinci Code would jeopardise the chances of a film of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail ever being made,'' he said.

Sony Pictures Entertainment has said it was going ahead with a mid-May launch of the movie, starring Tom Hanks, despite the copyright case.

Brown, 41, one of the world's richest authors, gave evidence for a third day, and faced allegations that not only had ideas from the 1982 work ended up in his religious thriller, but also specific words and phrases. Brown showed signs of quiet exasperation at the detailed line of questioning over chronology and textual similarities.

''You have copied from HBHG (Holy Blood, Holy Grail),'' said the historians' lawyer Jonathan Rayner James.

''I would disagree with that,'' Brown countered, saying that the passages in question were not identical.

Brown was expected to finish in the witness box later on Wednesday, and the case is due to finish on Monday. There could be several weeks before judgment is passed.

REUTERS SHR KN2124