talkmagic.co.uk

It's come up in magicdiscoman's review thread about the egg can that you can sometimes work out the method of a trick from a retailers demo vid. this has happened to me a few times, most notably with stigmata. i saw the vid, sussed the method and did the trick the next time someone was available. now it's a shame for the originator of a trick if the vid they are putting out to promote an effect actually tips the method, or at least leaves the magi with enough hints to figure it out. if this happens it is fair enough to perform the trick and hard cheese for the originator or should you still pay for it? i know that you will get the full instructions with everything fully worked out and performance tips and suchlike, but i think most magicians have an idea about how to present things.
is this considered theft or not?

it is fair enough to perform the trick and hard cheese for the originator or should you still pay for it?

and if someone else posts the expose on u-tube should we whatch it.

this is going to be a topical debate I'm sure, iv'e certainly paid good money for old tat based on old ideas so I'm on the fence with this one.

back in the dark ages before the internet we would take a description of a trick we saw performed and hit the magic libary to work out how it was done then it was called creativity and learning your craft.
i don't know what they call the spoon fed drivel today.

magicdiscoman wrote: and if someone else posts the expose on u-tube should we whatch it.

sussing something out from a demo is definitely not the same as not being able to work out the method and watching an expose on youtube.
IMO.

There's a crucial point raised here:

If I personally deduce how an effect is done by watching a performance, does this give me the right to perform it?

I would personally (from an ethics/morals P.O.V.) say no. It doesn't give you the right to perform the effect.

When you purchase an effect, it's rather like purchasing a CD or DVD (music or movies). You aren't paying for the physical object... that is merely a vehicle. What you are paying for is the RIGHT to be able to listen to that music. Ergo, if you can record your favourite music tracks off the radio, and listen to them in the car, you don't really have any ownership or rights to facilitate your listening to that music at all.

In magic, there's no hard or set copyright rules. It's based on a bit of trust and respect, really. i.e. if you purchase a magic effect, you aren't purchasing the SECRET so much as the RIGHT TO PERFORM.

It's a difficult one, and all you really need to do get a grip on the morals and ethics involved is publish your own work... this certainly gives you a sense of meaning as to why it's unpleasant for people to effectively poach your effects.

To be honest, if you do figure out the method it might still be worth your while buying the effect anyway. If you buy it, you usually get much more than just the method, you'll get performace tips and other ideas too.

I would been tempted to inform the website in question. Hopefully they'd change the video.
This has happened to me a number of times, I've seen the video, or read the synopsis, ordered it and before it has arrived I've worked out A method of doing it. Surely one side of the debate lies here; until it has arrived, how can i be sure the methods are the same?
If I see a trick and think, hhm, you could do that like this, does that mean I have to buy the trick before I can perform what could possibly be my unique version of it?
I don't believe in or support copyright or intellectual theft, I work in the film and tv industry, so I despise it, but that is a little more clear cut than here, where you can't be sure you've stolen an idea.
Although reading that back, there's a difference between working somthing out and spotting and stealing a method.

Hmm, I have confused and lost myself now.

seige wrote: if you can record your favourite music tracks off the radio, and listen to them in the car, you don't really have any ownership or rights to facilitate your listening to that music at all.

In magic, there's no hard or set copyright rules. It's based on a bit of trust and respect, really. i.e. if you purchase a magic effect, you aren't purchasing the SECRET so much as the RIGHT TO PERFORM.

Is it so hard and fast as this though? if i see a trick performed and then reproduce that effect for a freind with methods i have figured out without buying the effect, isn't this more like like hearing something on the radio then picking up my guitar and playing that for a friend? also, is there a moral distinction between the amateur doing tricks for friends and family and the professional doing paid work?

seige wrote: It's a difficult one, and all you really need to do get a grip on the morals and ethics involved is publish your own work... this certainly gives you a sense of meaning as to why it's unpleasant for people to effectively poach your effects.

one day, you never know but i can totally see your point the and "how would i feel" certainly crossed my mind.

Partypaul2007 wrote:I would been tempted to inform the website in question. Hopefully they'd change the video.
This has happened to me a number of times, I've seen the video, or read the synopsis, ordered it and before it has arrived I've worked out A method of doing it. Surely one side of the debate lies here; until it has arrived, how can i be sure the methods are the same?
If I see a trick and think, hhm, you could do that like this, does that mean I have to buy the trick before I can perform what could possibly be my unique version of it?
I don't believe in or support copyright or intellectual theft, I work in the film and tv industry, so I despise it, but that is a little more clear cut than here, where you can't be sure you've stolen an idea.
Although reading that back, there's a difference between working somthing out and spotting and stealing a method.

Hmm, I have confused and lost myself now.

exactly! i don't know that my method is the one in the stigamta dvd, it could be totally different, in fact the only thing that is similar to the demo vid is turning my back while the spec chooses their card and shuffles, i do know i do everything else my own way (i think). you don't see the marks on the guy's arm either so these could be totally different. anyway i stared this thread because of the dilemma I'm in when wanting to perform this effect. after all i wouldn't have come up with the idea of revealing someones card like that on my own so really that's the 'stolen' part. but if i see someone making a ball float then go home and devise my own method for that am i 'stealing' that?

I have also now confused myself

really i wanted seige to come on and say "clever you, go ahead and do it for money"

I've has sort of the reverse. Saw demo, thought I had worked it out, bought it and the method I'd paid for was worse than I could have imagined!

It's a tricky one.
Say if I want to walk on water;
Do I have to purchase every method out there to see if mine is any different? Not really possible according to another thread on here. And if it is different do I get my money back and my memory erased?
Surely the first person to walk on water doesn't have exclusive right to the illusion.
This cannot be black and white unless there is some copyright law implemented, so basically it's down to what you think is right for you and your conscience.

and if someone else posts the expose on u-tube should we whatch it.

yes its a noodle scratcher all right but just to clarify.

you watch a demo of the svengali deck and work out how to do the svengali card force, you go home and practise (secret deliberatly obscured in case real exposers reading this post).

a u-tuber works out the same method and braodcasts it to the world.

which of you has the moral imperative to use what he has found out..............

mr u-tuber because people should know how clever he is and all stuff should be free anyway.

you, because your a magician and just one person and your keeping magic alive by performing it.

if you borrow your friends complet course in magic and learn the svengali card force, should you have the right to perfrom it.

beeno wrote:It's a tricky one.
Say if I want to walk on water;
Do I have to purchase every method out there to see if mine is any different? Not really possible according to another thread on here. And if it is different do I get my money back and my memory erased?
Surely the first person to walk on water doesn't have exclusive right to the illusion.
This cannot be black and white unless there is some copyright law implemented, so basically it's down to what you think is right for you and your conscience.

This is a different matter - although what I say applies more to close-up magic as I realise that with these big illusions there are more copyright laws and all of that involved.

But let's take the basic idea of you creating a card effect for instance. If you want to perform it do you have to buy others to see if it's been done before? I would say not. Provided you've created it independently of the marketed effect - i.e. you did not know about it - then there is nothing wrong with not buying a marketed effect of the same kind because what you have created is a product entirely of your own imagination. You have not borrowed (in terms of effect or method/handling) from somebody else. So I would say by all means go ahead and perform it without buying the marketed version.

If however you see a novel idea - e.g. an ACR in which the card becomes a signed orange fruit with the card printed on it or whatever - and with or without any clue of the method go ahead and make your own version, well, I would still be inclined to buy the original because 1) you are more likely to have a better and more complete effect and 2) the idea is not yours - it is inspired by somebody else's and IMO you owe them for giving you that idea (you would not be performing your effect, most likely, without theirs).

With something generic like Card To Wallet then I would say it's fine to come up with your own version and not buying the others.

So - in summary - if you create something without knowing about a marketed effect then that is okay; you owe the creators of the marketed effects nothing. If, however, the marketed effect consciously inspired yours, then I feel that you do owe the creator because your effect is dependent upon his (although it is hard to say with certainty that you would not have created the same without theirs).

Of course if you want to market it then it's an entirely different ballgame and you must research others to ensure that you are not releasing something which infringes on another's ideas.

Again - I say this applies to the majority of close-up magic. I certainly cannot speak for stage illusions and such.

As for the rest of the debate, well, I completely agree with seige.

I say if a company is stupid enough to release a demo of a product but then reveal the workings (or enough clues) then tough nuggets for them. It's like that story of the boy, the king, and the chess board where he boy asked for a grain of rice on one square, two on the next, four on the next and so on until he got what he wanted. Can we help it if we're as clever or more clever than the average shmuck who is running the videos?

monker59 wrote:I say if a company is stupid enough to release a demo of a product but then reveal the workings (or enough clues) then tough nuggets for them. It's like that story of the boy, the king, and the chess board where he boy asked for a grain of rice on one square, two on the next, four on the next and so on until he got what he wanted. Can we help it if we're as clever or more clever than the average shmuck who is running the videos?

I completely disagree. I think you'll find that videos which reveal the workings are very rare. A video can be perfectly well-performed but because of the experience a magician has they can easily reverse-engineer it; it s not a matter of a poor performance.

But even so: does that give you the RIGHT to perform the effect without buying it? No it doesn't. In most instances the creator is divorced from the person in the video; they have no real control over that. But you are saying that because the RETAILER'S demo video exposes (even though they rarely do) the workings it is okay to rip off the CREATOR who often has no real control over it?

And yes, you can help it, because although you may be 'clever' enough to figure out something that doesn't mean you have to perform it when you have no right to.

Cardza wrote:With something generic like Card To Wallet then I would say it's fine to come up with your own version and not buying the others.

The problem with that though is, when does an effect become generic?
Someone was the first to do this effect, just like someone was the first to include final loads of fruit in cups and balls. Is it possible to draw a hard line on this?