talkmagic.co.uk

Now I think we're getting confused about what a "trick" is. So let's cattagorize a performance for say a card magician.

Routine - A series of linked or cronnological magic tricks in an entire performance.

Magic Trick - a trick that is created through a chain of card manipulations and finishing with a finale that appears to be illogical or beyond normall comprehention and belief.
Example - Ace Asembly, Trimuph, Renegade, Nemesis, Twisting Aces

Manipulation - any hand motion in which to control, force, XMC, or in any way effect the condition of the deck or individual cards.
Example - Counts, Shuffles, Cuts, Sticky Cards, Controls, Forces

I think it is obvious that a routine and especially it's name can be copyrighted. But what about the subcattagorizes? Can you copyright a Manipualtion.

I totally agree Rune but at the end we are here discussing copyright things and they(pubtricks) are happily selling those stuff in the meanwhile and I don't see any lawsuits on their backs....so I ask myself who is stupid in this story? me or them?

And what would be the costs of a video when you would have to track down every inventor of the move you use? Not to mention the time effort for that....just to make one video and earn 10 - 20 bucks? Just doesn't make sense...

Why won't this forum just die and be solved!!!

Now here I am about to bring up Penguin. PM has many tricks (more directly at Instant Downloads) that they didn't make, and yet - nothing. Its as if they own all of them. So if I took their tricks, changed the name, and pawned them off - nothing.

PS - point, I'm surprised you know latin also.

Exactly....but not just PM....how about Magic Makers..everyone has been going on about them and how they don't respect copyrights and yadda yadda yadda but in the meantime they sell things with no problems and make profit from that...And we are here trying to do the right thing..but at the end what is the right thing?

PS. Yeah I had latin in my high school for 4 years

And what would be the costs of a video when you would have to track down every inventor of the move you use? Not to mention the time effort for that....just to make one video and earn 10 - 20 bucks? Just doesn't make sense...

Well, you know what doesn't make sense? Your sentence Do you think the creators and owners of moves, tricks, or whatever, care about how long it takes for you to track them down? Oh no, if they have a copyright, they will use it, and your time is not of their concern....

i think what he is saying is that of all the tricks on PM, surely they didn't do this inconcievable tracking nonesense (what if the person was dead?), they just listed the trick, and then they gave credit where needed, just by name alone, not by any royalties of a copywrite.

so what it all boils down to, is they don't track down, and search for anything, they just do it, and there's nothing nobody can do about it, so that's what he is trying to say. cause if this were the case, then PM would not exsist in the same way it does today.

Thanx magicmatthews that's exactly what I'm saying....

And Rune we all want to do the right thing...

Maybe a little bit off topic..I've talked to our "customer protection agency" who deals with customers and products and by our law If I buy a product I can do what I want with it because it is mine. They said that magic tricks have that something extra which is called "explanation" or a "secret" and if you (as a customer) are not allowed to sell or reveal that (although you did buy that product) than this has to be clearly stated to you before you buy it.....Because If I buy a DVD(non magic one) I can let my frind see it and I can also sell that DVD to someone else...Because it is mine....

If i reproduce it than that's breaking the copyrights...

So basicly I think that the magic community (the ones that make a big profit, magicians, trick inventors) should make the rules and maybe establish an agency that will deal with such things...If they want to protect they're work...Until there's no such agency and there is a mess in that part they cannot expect for people to follow the rules which are not even clear...

I do agree that everyone should get credit and even money for their work but I also think that THEY should do something about it if they want that system to work....not me....

Idealy there would be an agency who would collect the money from tricks and then send that money to the crreators....And who has to establish that agency?Creators or the customers?....I'm gonna go with creators on this one because that's in their interest....

We're now on page 5 of this topic and all we had was "This one said so" and "the other one said like this"...let's face it noone is even 10% sure what to do....not even creators themself...

I'm more than willing to give credit and money to the creators but I'm not going to spend 1000 of dollars and 6 months of 8hours/per day tracking to make a 10$...

If they want me to keep things in order they'll have to create that order first and I'll be more than happy to play by the rules....

Well, let's twist it.
What if YOU came up with a GREAT trick, the MOST IMPOSSIBLE ULTIMATE FREAKING CRAZY TRICK EVER !... and someone just starts selling the trick half price of yours, and just "credit you", in a short line... how would that make you feel?

Good point Rune and I was waiting for that. In that case I could go frantic for all that I want but I couldn't do much because there's no system that would help me protect from this things happening...So it would be up to me to find a way how to deal with that. ME not the one who did that...But that's just how I see things...

Only thing you could do in that case is to try to sell it yourself and get maximum out of it(I mean cash) before someone else does it "half" the price...because at the end it's just a matter of time when that will happen as there are no clear rules about it...

Where'd you guys go. We can't just forget about this forum, without the matter being solved!!

I don't think it's possible to solve it.... unless you can PROOVE 100% that a trick or a move, can't be or isn't copyrighted....

Wow! There are a lot of opinions on this thread but few facts.

Here are some URLs I found that keep it pretty simple. They are based on US law, but the differences world-wide are not huge.

http://www.templetons.com/brad/copyright.html
http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

I am not a lawyer, but I am pretty sure of most of the following points:

Intellectual Property law has various aspects. Mainly copyright, patents & trademarks.
Trademarks is pretty straightforward - you cannot pretend to be a branch of Woolworhs if you are not; or say the jeans you sell are Levis if they are not. Etc etc.

Inventions can & must be explicitly patented. You cannot patent an idea or theory, but you can patent a specific application of it. The patent belongs to whoever registers it first - not to the 'original' inventor. However, I don't think anyone can patent something that is already public knowledge (not sure of that though). I presume there are guidelines for what makes one design sufficiently different from a patented one to be ok. No one can use a patented design until the patent expires. (Unless they have permission for which they probably pay a royalty). A good example is Dyson vacuum cleaners. For 10 years no lookalikes were allowed - now they are.
Some magic gimmicks could probably be patented. Eg any physical device. Probably not things like gimmicked cards though.

Copyright is very different. You do NOT have to register. It applies to any creative effort (whatever that means!). But it MUST be recorded in some way Eg a book, music, software. It cannot just exist in your head. You cannot really copyright an idea - but you can copyright its recorded form.
If two or more people produce similar works independently, then this probably is NOT a breach of copyright. Copyright is all about deliberate plagiarism (not sure where the burden of proof lies though).
Copyright lasts a fixed time i think (100 years?????)
So... If I copy large sections of a book or DVD and call it my own I am probably in breach of copyright.
But if I express the authors ideas in my own words, I am not.

A lot of what people do in practice, is legally meaningless. EG putting a copyright notice on something or leaving it off makes no legal difference. But putting it on does act as a warning that you are likely to act to enforce your rights.

A lot of lawyers will make empty threats because they know most people will back down. So if you hear those stories, always see if they actually follow through with legal action. (EG I heard Criss Angel has threatened vendors to drop Icarus - which has apparently worked)

I suspect that creators of magic tricks have very little legal protection. You CANNOT copyright or patent a physical act (sorry Kati, that is wrong).
If you invent a gimmick, you can patent it. If you make a DVD or book (or even PDF), that 'creative work' is copyright.
But what about the ideas expressed in your DVD etc. I suspect this must depend on whether they are legally deemed to be a Creative Work themselves. Can someone on here answer that specific question???

Finally, bear in mind that people often act for moral rather than legal motives. Or they are legally motivated but mistaken about legal facts. EG authors who give credits to magi of yore do so out of respect for those magicians, and a desire to spread knowledge of the history of magic. Putting a credit in a book or video certainly does NOT automatically give you the right to use copyrighted material without permission.

I certainly don't think anyone could copyright an effect (as opposed to a method). In the early days of magic, magicians copied each others' effects but devised their own methods. And they still do.

I apologise for the length of this post (and continuing to keep this thread alive), but I have an personal interest in this area of law. Nikodemus, by using your post as a basis for my commentary I do not wish to demean the research you have done, but simply to clarify some of the points you've made.

First let me say that if you are concerned about infringing copyright and/or patent law you must contact a lawyer. Most large practices have specialists who deal with intellectual property rights. Patent advice tends to be more specialised and for that you will need to contact a patent attorney.

In otherwords, DO NOT depend on the advice given in this forum. So now I have asked you to clearly ignore everything I say, here is my understanding. Note that I only have an understanding of UK Law, and related International conventions. Also note that I am not a lawyer, and again you should seek proper legal advice.

Nikodemus interpretation of the information in the URLs is broadly correct. Here are some notes, and some responses to the issues raised.

Nikodemus wrote:Here are some URLs I found that keep it pretty simple. They are based on US law, but the differences world-wide are not huge.

Actually, I disagree with this. The legal position in the US is very different that in the UK and this is why it is important to get proper legal advice. US law is for the most part prescriptive, the UK is not. In other words, your legal position in the UK may not be clear cut, thus the requirement for legal advice.

Nikodemus wrote:Trademarks is pretty straightforward - you cannot pretend to be a branch of Woolworhs if you are not; or say the jeans you sell are Levis if they are not. Etc etc.

Partially correct. You cannot use the Woolworths of Levis trademark, on your goods. Other aspects of this are covered by Company Law which stops you from passing off your own work as others in circumstances where trademark law does not apply. For example I could create a Levi graphic which was substantively different from the Levi brand and would not breach trademark law. Under this circumstance I would fall foul of company law as I would arguably be materially impacting the Levi brand.

Nikodemus wrote:Inventions can & must be explicitly patented. You cannot patent an idea or theory, but you can patent a specific application of it. ...

However, I don't think anyone can patent something that is already public knowledge (not sure of that though). I presume there are guidelines for what makes one design sufficiently different from a patented one to be ok. ...

Some magic gimmicks could probably be patented. Eg any physical device. Probably not things like gimmicked cards though.

You cannot patent a design which is already in the public domain. Note that because of how the term public domain is used in the UK, a design can be both secret and in the public domain, although this does not relate to the issue at hand.

There are no guidelines as granting of the application is under the objective control of the patent registrar. The invention must be substatively different, a legal term which could will cost you bug bucks if you need to go to court.

I disagree with gimmicked cards not being patentable. This almost certainly does not occur due to cost of a patent application. For example, a single patent would cost me about £10,000 and thats for the US only. It is probably a straightforward commercial decision which stops gimmick producers from patenting their designs.

In the case of large David Copperfield type illusions, there is a clear cut commercial case for a patent application, and the protection it provides.

Nikodemus wrote:If two or more people produce similar works independently, then this probably is NOT a breach of copyright. Copyright is all about deliberate plagiarism (not sure where the burden of proof lies though).

If two authors creating similar works independently, copyright vests with both creators related to their own work. Unless, one creator can prove that the others work is a derivative of their own. As I understand it the burden proof lies with the complainant.

Nikodemus wrote:Copyright lasts a fixed time i think (100 years?????)

Copyright Lasts for 70 years after the death of the copyright owner(s).

Nikodemus wrote:So... If I copy large sections of a book or DVD and call it my own I am probably in breach of copyright.
But if I express the authors ideas in my own words, I am not.

If you copy large sections of DVD or book and call it your own you are most certainly in breach of copyright.

Expressing an idea in different words is acceptable but would need to be substantively different from the original. This is an important term which we cannot define clearly (this is why you need the advice of a lawyer).

Nikodemus wrote:A lot of what people do in practice, is legally meaningless.

I'll disagree, but I know what you mean.

Everything people do in practise has legal meaning, but generally this is overriden by commercial requirements. Legal work for the most part is posturing.

If I create a small gimmick, I will simply not bother to patent it, because I am unlikely to recover the large expense of executing a patent application. I am therefore unprotected but luckily this is the case for my competition, so market forces prevail.

I cannot comment on the Criss angel story as I do not understand the background.

For arguments sake lets imagine a similar situation. I could understand the magic outlets actions being determined by the following drivers:

*They do not want to engage in any legal action due to the expense (even if they have a case).
*They do not want to discontinue or impact any existing or future relationship with a well known brand.
*They do not want any negative press to impact their brand. Theft is a serious accusation for any business, whether its true or not. A very recent case comes to mind.

As you stated previously you cannot copyright an idea only the expression of an idea. I am therefore free to discuss the DL and its variants at length, as long as my description is substantively different from other expressions, so that I am not deemed to have derived the work. I can perform public domain routines based on those sleights, or of course my own.

I broadly agree with your final statement. You do credit a magician due to ethics. It not only shows respect but also stops any inference by other magicians that you have stolen anothers work.

Pablo Picasso wrote:Good artists copy; great artists steal.

Thats a quote by the way and is fair use. Also note in quoting your message I am technically in breach of your copyright. Although it is clearly defensible in court as fair use (honest!). What Picasso was expressing was the that in moving forward, an art work is by definintion derivative. To move magic forward we need to take what has gone before and move it forward. We should do this with the upmost respect to those who have gone before. Am I saying this is a big fat gray area, oh yes I am.

To return to the original question...
Yes you can make a tape and explain ID and sell it, as long as you do not breach other copyright material (now thats a get out, isnt it).

Will it cause you legal problems, maybe. But remember you can be legally challenged, whether the opposition have a case or not. You not only need to be right, you need to be able to afford to be right.

Historically, I believe that the ID is derived from the Brainwave deck orginated by Dai Vernon (surprise surprise). I could not find any patents related to the deck itself and none are declared on the documentation provided with the product. Any patents that do exist will almost certainly be related to the production of the deck itself. Since the hand made version of the deck predates the product, I doubt this is patented. Lets face it we can all make our own invisible decks if we could be bothered.

Be very careful when performing other peoples routines though. If I pick up the instructions from the ID and publically perform them, I am technically in breach of copyright law. This is called a transformation; in other words if I take copyright material in one media and move it to another the original copyright owners rights still apply.

Did you now that when you perform your ID routine your in breach of copyright? Actually your not, thats why I used the term technically. It can clearly be argued that the instructions convey the right to perform the routine publically. This may not be so clear cut if I perform them on a DVD and sell it though.

So thats the position (for what its worth), and heres your choices:

* Publish and be damned.
* Get advice from a lawyer (some cash required).
* Get in bed with a publisher/dealer who will hopefully have more experience of this subject area.

If I were to produce my own DVD I would certainly get advice from a lawyer regarding the finer points of copyright law. I would advise you to
do the same.

Clear as mud. Good luck and keep us up to date with your progress.

NOTE to Admin, you should probably put an acceptance Creative Commons copyright usage as part of the registration terms and conditions. I would advise [link]http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/[/link]. Just a thought.

Having just reread my previous post in the context of the rest of this forum. I clearly braindumped. Forgive me, way too much xmas punch.

I am making enquiries and will hopefully return with something a little more concrete and less verbose.

Fantastic! I think this is the post everyone has been waiting for.

I will just clarify one point where I didn't express myself properly. When I said people do things that are legally meaningless, I meant that they are not grounded in actual law. EG I might put a warning/disclaimer/credit on a product that makes no actual legal difference to anyone's rights or responsibilities. Or I might threaten to sue you even though legally I haven't got a leg to stand on. This kind of real-politik goes on all the time in many walks of life.

Anyway, thanks for your excellent post.
PS Wanna buy some dodgy DVDs????