Terrible wizard-

Virtually ALL of your arguments are circular because you keep asking the same questions over and over again and, when you get answers, you just continue by asking "why?," rather than offering any substantive contributions of your own.

It seems that you simply want to see how long you can stretch out a sophomoric game with you acting as master of ceremonies.

Mastermindreader:
I'm not sure that's a correct usage of the term 'circular argument'. As to the rest, it's just wrong. But if you don't wish to contribute no one is making you. Why get involved at all? What are you trying to do with posts that are, effectively, derailing attempts?

Tessler:
How so? And are you referring to the OP or something else?

Oh, that's pretty funny...guy makes it through law school, becomes one of the top mentalists in the country, and you're trying to tell him the definition of words and terms...and yeah, the OP, which is you...and if you take a look at several threads you've started, it's clear you do know the definition of "circular argument"...

Pardon? Where have I even done what you falsely accuse me of????

What exactly have I done to offend you?

Look up the definition of circular argument.

This is odd and rude behaviour. I find the café so weird at times.

Wow.

I too was amazed at the behaviours found here. But I'm getting used to it.

Yet another perfectly decent thread derailed into some personal insult exchange. Nice.

If people would be so kind as to focus on the thread topic rather than my perceived failings as a human being, that'd be great

Wow.

As to the E scenario and I'm gonna get some flax for this but if I can deconstruct an effect, then the information is already in my mind. I'm no going to pay for what I already know. Knowledge is power and being able to deconstruct effects is a powerful tool. If a method is so obvious or easily diconstructable, it's probably not worth doing? But if I did choose to do it for the lay, I wouldn't pay for it.

What's the matter with you two (Bob Cassidy and Tesla)? Terrible Wizard is asking legit questions and you jump all over him. For what? And Bob doesn't even contribute substantively, just condemns. For the record and because such resume items seem important to Tesla, I, too, am a law school graduate and have two degrees in the English language (BA English, MA English Lit), and Bob's notion of a circular argument is incorrect, just as TW said. TW is asking questions and seeking clarifications to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions. It's a legit technique (which, by the way, is a staple of law school professors everywhere).

Please lay off TW, he's just posing a question in which the distinctions made are ethically interesting to him, as they are to me. I'd like to read people's thoughts on the subject, without the chill imposed by petty insults. For example, I think people's ethical distinctions between C and D and the reasons behind them are quite interesting. I'd like to hear more.

My own general take involves drawing a distinction between methods and presentation. In most cases, I think method is fair game for all, but presentation is particular to the person, and in most cases should not be duplicated without permission, either express (asking the author) or implied by purchase. The question posed by the OP involves line-drawing, and whenever we're in that business members of any group are likely to draw them in different places. I like to hear those reasons so I can better assess and examine where I draw my own.

I guarantee Bob will not be harassing Terrible Wizard any more.

In addition to other threads that might get you some perspective try the RIP Bob Cassidy one.

Aw, crappola. I had completely forgotten all about that. No Bueno. I remember, now. If I recall, it was right on the heels of Daryl's death, which I was so preoccupied with that I barely noticed Bob's. I knew Daryl, I did not know Bob. Indeed, there are so many deaths this past year, it's hard to keep them all straight. A bad year in magic.

Also, I hadn't noticed that this was an old thread. Now I feel like an idiot. Maybe I should have coffee before I post in the morning.

Danaruns, because you asked and because I can't help but accommodate a beautiful woman "wink". I think there is a difference between C and D in that in D the effect was bought by an individual which is how it was sold. To so call "lend" the modern DVD or book, is giving away someone elses work. In the C scenario, as a member of a club, the library would most likely have older workss considered standard in our industry. Another word might be "classic". Many of us consider the classics to be fair game but as you noted in your post, ask that people put there own spin in presentation on them to make them, their own.

An illustration; no body can lay claim to the linking rings as they are a classic of magic. many routines such as symphony of the rings and
the standards in Tarbell would be considered OK in the eyes of most magicians. However, the Colombini 3 Ring Circus, could be considered a no no if performed the same way?

Hope that helps a bit? It can be a little confusing, ethically.

The reason you are NOT an idiot is you have an ability that is rare. You step back and admit an honest mistake.

I respect that and may but heads occasionally with you, but this really says a lot about who you are a person.

You are most certainly not an idiot.

Bob was a friend of mine and I know he would say exactly what I just did.

I appreciate your grace, but I am in fact President For Life of the NAIAA (National Association of Idiots of America Association). I own up to mistakes when I recognize them because not doing so makes me look even worse and simply prolongs the agony, as legions of better people remind me how stupid I am since I seem to have forgotten.

Anyway....Oops. And it's particularly distasteful reprimanding deceased people. Gawd...

Where and when is our next meeting of the National Association of Idiots of America Association? I'm such an idiot I keep forgetting.

It is not grace. It is just a guy who makes a LOT of mistakes he has to admit is all!

You idiots have named your N.A.I.A.A. association over-redundantly. I am reporting you to the D.R.D. (Department of Redundancy Department).

I think it's f)

F] you illegally download or buy a copy of the DVD/book and then learn/perform it

The rest are all a bit meh. In that either it's hard to establish who/where the effect came from, or someone paid for a legit copy. Just because your friend buys a book/DVD or you borrow one from a library - it shouldn't preclude you from doing the trick, as the author has been paid.

Unless I am wrong, you can lend films/DVD/books [originals]

So if you learn from them, why should there be anything wrong from that - as the item has been bought and the effect originator paid

Or are we arguing that you shouldn't allowed to lend/sell/etc any magic DVDs/Books you have bought [?]

Personally I am of the opinion that if one wishes to perform a specific trick, or if one is strongly inspired by a specific trick, that is still on the market, one should compensate the creator of that trick before performing it.

As in - If I watch the trailer for Nailed It!, and I come up with my own way to do it, I still purchase the product because I don't know if I would have had the idea in the first place without seeing that trailer. The creator deserves compensation for the service they have (unknowingly) provided me.

This insures that creators will continue to put out creative and interesting work, which in turns continues to inspire me. If creators are not compensated, they are not motivated to put the time and energy into releasing the good stuff, and we continue to have a market saturated with mediocre products.

So to answer The Duster - If I borrow a DVD from someone and like the method on the DVD, I go buy the DVD myself, thus also purchasing the performance rights and compensating the creator.

Take care of those who take care of you. If someone provided something that gives you value, give them value. See how that works? Most magicians in the world don't.