talkmagic.co.uk

by **Mr_Grue** » Apr 24th, '11, 20:01

Oh and on the subject of the Derren Brown effect, it appears to use a technique that Daniel Madison put out, so it really does come down to whether or not they own Madison's manuscript on the effect, and whether or not they have the permission to use Brown's presentation of it1. I don't know whether Madison's effect predates Browns, however.

1 This is why the civil/legal distinction is important. It's ultimately down to the intellectual property owner to decide whether or not to take people to task should they infringe on that intellectual property. One is, of course, still free to make judgements on the morality of those who systematically infringe on the IP of others; but that is pretty much all you can do!

by **jim ferguson** » Apr 24th, '11, 20:13

Mr_Grue wrote:I am contractually obliged to point out that theft is a criminal offence, but infringement of intellectual property rights is a civil offence. Just legal semantics, but it's an important disctinction to some.
I think my own personal line in the sand is whether or not you're going to perform it, be that for money or otherwise. I've reverse engineered many an effect over the years (I really can't help myself), and have paid for the stuff I've gone onto use. This is not solely for ethical reasons, as working out the core technique is often less than half the battle. If an effect producer has done their work and performed the effect a few hundred times before releasing it, then they are hopefully going to supplement the core technique with a subtleties, troubleshooting, contingencies and more. Sadly this is often far from the case, but that's a discussion for another day.
The ethical element is still very strong though. I acquired by nefarious means, and long before I knew any better, the Bizarre Vanish by Paul Harris. Spent a short while performing it, but eventually the guilt took its toll, and I stopped. We're supposed, as performers, to make effects our own. It's hard enough to do that when we've actually paid for the right to perform them, let alone when we've ripped off the creator.

by **jim ferguson** » Apr 24th, '11, 20:27

Grimshaw wrote:The magicians you spoke of that have taken the effect that Derren performed for Wossy, did they steal his presentational framing too? As in, they did it for a couple to illustrate that they have a connection?
I'm not sure which ACR Blaine uses to be honest. It seems that the passage of time dictates what can be 'stolen' and what can't...

I couldnt say for certain, its a while since I read the thread. Id have to find it again - are you in the restricted area ? I think thats where I read it.Its also been a while since I seen Blaines ACR but from what I remember it was just standard stuff. I recall a few different versions he did so he may change it up each time to suit the situation.

jim

by **phillipnorthfield** » Apr 24th, '11, 20:54

The problem stems from laymen's knowledge of what you are presenting. I've seen countless people performing other peoples routines word for word, and laymen find it funny because they don't know it's someone elses material, and they assume what you are doing is your own.

Therefore in the eyes of the performer who has stolen the routine it's something that is OK to do, simply because of the fact they won't get caught. On the subject of DB however, I think it's fair to say he's pretty safe, people would know if someone else was using his material and call him on it (..or a tiny goatee'd her... not sexist). It's other performers who aren't well known who have the odd line, or presentation stolen from them that hurts the most.

Personally I wouldn't be able to do someone elses material word for word, I don't see the point, imitation is not art, and even 'cover' versions at least change it a little bit. In music it's seen as OK, but I'm fairly sure no-one would wan't to see a famous magician tribute act.

by **oskar** » Apr 24th, '11, 21:10

I recently contacted another magician to ask if I could have permission to perform something that I had seen them do an a promo video. It was two tricks - neither of which were his - but he had combined them to create a stronger routine.

He declined to release the idea and so I won't be performing them. It is nothing to do with the law, it is a mutual respect for your fellow performers and for magic.

by **TonyB** » Apr 24th, '11, 21:25

My view is that if you work out the method someone uses for a trick you are quite entitled to use that method. However if you use his presentation as well, you have stepped over a line you shouldn't cross.

It's like the car example; nothing to stop me making my own cars. But if I copy the body work of a Ferrari, and the specifications, etc, then I am stealing. If I copy their exact engine, I am stealing.

Some of us reinvent the wheel. I came up with a great way of getting someone's star sign using Progressive Anagrams. Then I discovered about six published methods. I came up with a procedure for getting three star signs of random people in an audience. Richard Osterlind had brought something similar out a few months before I came up with my method. I can perform both effects - in my way - but I believe I would be in the wrong if I tried to publish them as something new and unique to me.

by **Grimshaw** » Apr 24th, '11, 21:32

phillipnorthfield wrote:Personally I wouldn't be able to do someone elses material word for word, I don't see the point, imitation is not art, and even 'cover' versions at least change it a little bit. In music it's seen as OK, but I'm fairly sure no-one would wan't to see a famous magician tribute act.

Interesting that you mention music, that's where I was going to go with it. Thing is there's plenty of musicians that write songs for others, and there's people out there that just create effects rather than perform them.

This is almost getting quantumy (my word, don't use it), where people believe that just because an effect is observed it changes the way a magician can act towards it.

I don't agree with copying dialogue word for word. I've mentioned elsewhere on this forum that Copperfield did a Paul Harris effect on his show and copied the patter word for word...left it rather sour to my eyes but the audience loved it of course.

I think if you have an interesting idea for a presentation on an effect that already exists, then go for it. Another magician may call you on it because they're aware of the 'original', but I'd wager you spend more time performing for anyone but.

by **magicollie** » Apr 24th, '11, 21:48

Mr_Grue wrote:Oh and on the subject of the Derren Brown effect, it appears to use a technique that Daniel Madison put out, so it really does come down to whether or not they own Madison's manuscript on the effect, and whether or not they have the permission to use Brown's presentation of it1. I don't know whether Madison's effect predates Browns, however.

1 This is why the civil/legal distinction is important. It's ultimately down to the intellectual property owner to decide whether or not to take people to task should they infringe on that intellectual property. One is, of course, still free to make judgements on the morality of those who systematically infringe on the IP of others; but that is pretty much all you can do!

Which manuscript was this?

by **phillipnorthfield** » Apr 24th, '11, 22:23

magicollie wrote:
Mr_Grue wrote:Oh and on the subject of the Derren Brown effect, it appears to use a technique that Daniel Madison put out, so it really does come down to whether or not they own Madison's manuscript on the effect, and whether or not they have the permission to use Brown's presentation of it1. I don't know whether Madison's effect predates Browns, however.

1 This is why the civil/legal distinction is important. It's ultimately down to the intellectual property owner to decide whether or not to take people to task should they infringe on that intellectual property. One is, of course, still free to make judgements on the morality of those who systematically infringe on the IP of others; but that is pretty much all you can do!

Which manuscript was this?

I think it was called 'Irreversible' or something along those lines. Quite cheap to pick up and a very clever method.

by **DeadSweet** » Apr 25th, '11, 00:49

oskar wrote:I recently contacted another magician to ask if I could have permission to perform something that I had seen them do an a promo video. It was two tricks - neither of which were his - but he had combined them to create a stronger routine.

He declined to release the idea and so I won't be performing them. It is nothing to do with the law, it is a mutual respect for your fellow performers and for magic.

I think thats very respectable....
also, now "damian" has put me on a mission to look for his new "nicknames" im getting all skeptical lizard face at new users

by **V.E. Day** » Apr 25th, '11, 03:53

I remember watching a video by Banachek and he said he was listening to the radio when he was living in South Africa and he said he worked out how to perform a fork bending routine from listening to another fork bender on the radio.
Only Banachek can do this, no one else can.

by **kalen7791** » Apr 25th, '11, 06:49

In my opinion if you figure out the method or a method for the effect you observed why not use it. Take it down to the nuts and bolts rework it and design your own presentation for the method to make it more personal. If you are performing it just as you observed then you are truly missing the art in magic. You are aspiring to be no more then a clone and are cheating not only the other performer but yourself. If someone were to ask me if it was my original idea would i take credit for it? No. I would state that this is performance of _______ _________ effect with my personal presentation.

If it is a unreleased effect then who can truly say the method behind it is the same as what you observed or thought you observed. Who truly among us hasn't done this? Is this comparable with Illegal downloads or buying a effect and reproducing it and marketing as the original. Or changing a small detail and marketing it as your own idea. Not in anyway that I am personally able to see.

I remember seeing a post where they where asking about a Inv deck and what kinds of _ _ _ _ _s could be used to make your own on another forum. Or on this forum someone wanting to find out if there is a Sven deck with all blanks simular to a Mental P deck. He was told that he should make one. If you made either wouldn't you essentially be stealing a copyrighted effect?

by **Jobasha** » Apr 25th, '11, 08:34

The copyright on trick decks is an interesting one. Svengali decks are credited to Burling Hull, which were patented 1909. Patents for a utility item last 20 years currently, for other items 50 years or the authors lifetime. So the rights to the idea would have gone now. In addition Burling sold the rights anyway during his lifetime and I believe to several companies. On top of this Burling was a magician who pushed for patents to recognise magicians intellectual property, however he plagiarised other magicians work and even the svengali deck may not of been his creation. So really there is little way of protecting a method once released. The trick remains in the delivery of it.

by **Robbie** » Apr 25th, '11, 11:29

Erwin wrote:Don't forget copyrighted material be it books or DVDs shouldn't be borrowed or resold second hand either. If you are going to buy a second hand book or DVD (or borrow one from a friend) you are denying the copyright owner a sale and it makes you no better than an illegal downloader.

This may be your personal moral code, and you're entitled to your opinion. But there's nothing illegal -- or for most people unethical -- about buying and selling secondhand books, disks, software, etc. The fact that a particular book contains magic tricks instead of a novel is beside the point.

If your only argument is that the author is being deprived of a sale, you could say the same for public libraries. Do you think library borrowers are no better than illegal downloaders?

by **Tomo** » Apr 25th, '11, 12:11

I'm turned off by the idea of other people's effects. I like watching them, but the idea of wanting to do them leaves me increasingly cold. I think you should always strive to be unique. After all, a great performance isn't about the effects. It's about you. So be the first you, not the second someone else. Find your own moon. Land on it. Nuff said (he wrote, obviously plagiarising a very old Playstation campaign tagline).

talkmagic.co.uk

Stealing

Who is online