| Go to page (Previous) 1 ~ 2 ~ 3 ~ 4 ~ 5 ~ 6 ~ 7 ~ 8 ~ 9 ~ 10 (Next) |
|
|
Jonathan Townsend
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
25257 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 15, 2004 8:30pm
What would it take to properly credit the material in Expert Card Technique and get the handling corrected for the tricks in that book?
Paul, what would it take for you to manage this process?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
Stuart Hooper
Special user
Mithrandir
760 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 15, 2004 8:51pm
Mr. Chosse, people are interested!
|
Black Magic
New user
New Orleans, La
87 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 15, 2004 8:59pm
Jon it was a joke. Some people say you should let people think you are stupid than to open your mouth and prove it....
|
rawdawg
Special user
Southern California
639 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 15, 2004 10:40pm
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-15 14:40, bishthemagish wrote:
Marco S. may be a friend of mine that sent me some of his work on disk. If so he is in the skill level of Jimmy Cards Molinari and others I have seen in cards.
I do not think that Marco S. is a performing magician that does shows or even wants to publish his ideas.
If it is true and he is the person that sent me his work on disk he is an outstanding card man.
|
|
Hello Bish,
Could you mail me a copy of Marco's work? I'd like to see if he has anything I could possibly use.
Heck, I'll even pay for the stamp.
As for the fracas at hand, I have found that if you keep your integrity high, your study diligent and your intentions sincere, you will eventually find access to some very clever things.
"Your tricks bear watching, Nom Anor. This has always been the case"
"I trick no one but myself, High Prefect, by imagining myself more than I am."
Nom Anor, The Unifying Force
|
Frank Starsini
Eternal Order
Northern California
12226 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 16, 2004 3:44am
That's a great idea Bish. Just post the videos right here for us to check out.
Marco... do you care?
www.theambitiouscard.com Hand Crafted Magic
Trophy Husband, Father of the Year Candidate,
Chippendale's Dancer applicant, Unofficial World Record Holder.
|
Marco S.
Inner circle
1017 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 16, 2004 7:57am
To Frank Starsini: I am not the one that bish thinks I am, so you will have to ask somebody else, my friend.
|
chrisrkline
Special user
Little Rock
965 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 16, 2004 8:57am
He asked you, though. What effects do you do? It is an easy question. Why don't you start small. Name one effect you do, I will name one, maybe Frank will name one.
I will start. One effect I do is Mongolian Pop Knot. Whit Haydn.
Chris
|
bishthemagish
Inner circle
5582 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 16, 2004 11:19am
First of all I am not 100% sure it is the same person. But I have a feeling it is. Second I wouldn't post any video without it being OK with the producer...
Just a few thoughts and opinion.
Glenn Bishop - Bish The Magish!
Magician, Card Sharp and Master Hypnotist.
http://glennbishopmagicandcards.blogspot.com
|
chrisrkline
Special user
Little Rock
965 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 16, 2004 11:20am
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-16 11:18, mazman16 wrote:
I don't think its stealing because 99% of magicians don't come up with their own stuff anyways. And I'm part of that 99 %
|
|
What does that have to do with anything? I don't come up with things either, except for the cash to buy the effects I perform or the respect for my fellow magi to ask permission if needed.
Chris
|
Black Magic
New user
New Orleans, La
87 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 16, 2004 11:47am
Did anybody get in touch with Tom, Mike, or Pat yet?
|
Jonathan Townsend
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
25257 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 16, 2004 11:59am
My guess is Tom is on the cover of a monthly magic related publication, and Mike might be wondering why he is off the mailing list for those exclusive videos.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
Frank Starsini
Eternal Order
Northern California
12226 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 16, 2004 2:48pm
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-16 11:47, Black Magic wrote:
Did anybody get in touch with Tom, Mike, or Pat yet?
|
|
Quote:
|
First of all I am not 100% sure it is the same person. But I have a feeling it is. Second I wouldn't post any video without it being OK with the producer...
|
|
Good answer Glenn!!! I wasn't testing you. Just joking around! 
One routine I love to perform is Cellini's Cups and Balls. I bought his book The Royal Touch, and learned it from there.
www.theambitiouscard.com Hand Crafted Magic
Trophy Husband, Father of the Year Candidate,
Chippendale's Dancer applicant, Unofficial World Record Holder.
|
Jonathan Townsend
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
25257 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 16, 2004 9:03pm
I strongly suggest we focus on acting in a way we would be pleased to find others acting.
Also, so we can stay away from real people and products, let's keep a focus on that hypothetical situations posted earlier.
This is about discussing what could be right, and gaining an understanding of each other's perspective.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
Patrick Differ
Inner circle
far enough south to surprise you
1492 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 18, 2004 6:08pm
If the texts are identical but the meaning is different...it's a matter of intent. So how do we honor the intent?
Is the intent meant as a tribute? If so, the intent could be honored, depending on the validity of the tribute. Is the intent meant as a study? Again, with validity, it too could be honored. Is it just using someone else's material and calling it his own? Probably not a good idea.
I'm not talking about music, golf swings, or comedy, or anything else. I'm talking about magic material, routines, and presentations. Just that.
|
chrisrkline
Special user
Little Rock
965 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 19, 2004 1:06am
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-18 09:55, Marco S. wrote:
Hey Chris, Frank asked for permission and for nothing else. So why do you care what effects I do?
|
|
Because you stated we were all hypocrites. You implied that we all use effects that, under our standards, we had no right to perform. You ether do the same thing--i.e. you use effects that you have not purchased or received permission to use--or you do not--i.e. you have purchased or received permission to perform all of your effects. If not, then why do you suppose we must be hyporcrites, since we claim that we do not either. Or you do, in which case I am interested to find out which effects you perform that you have not paid for or obtained permission for.
What's the big deal?
And Frank did ask what effects you do. You just ignored it.
Chris
|
Jonathan Townsend
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
25257 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 19, 2004 7:44am
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-18 18:08, Patrick Differ wrote:
If the texts are identical but the meaning is different...it's a matter of intent. So how do we honor the intent?
Is the intent meant as a tribute? |
|
A re-creation of the work Don Quixote from source material arguably has a completely different meaning than the original. The result may be a copy, but is the process that of copying?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
Marco S.
Inner circle
1017 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 19, 2004 7:51am
Chris, Frank asked for permission and nothing else.
I have never said I steal effects or sleights. The effects I do are tricks other magicians do too. And they are not stolen. By the way, you couldn`t find out anyhow. But I guess you think I am not saying the truth, for a reason I don`t know.
|
Open Traveller
Inner circle
1087 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 19, 2004 10:18am
Quote:
|
I have never said I steal effects or sleights. The effects I do are tricks other magicians do too. And they are not stolen. By the way, you couldn`t find out anyhow. But I guess you think I am not saying the truth, for a reason I don`t know.
|
|
I can't speak for Chris, but I don't think you're not saying the truth, although you've accused me of not being honest. I just think you have a clearly different definition of what constitutes "stealing" and what doesn't.
Many (but not all) of the effects I do, for example, are ones other magicians do, too. But I can't think of any case where I simply saw another magician doing it, deconstructed it, and thought I was entitled to do it, too. That was the original question that started all this, and your immediate response to it was that it's perfectly okay to start performing something simply by virtue of the fact that you saw it somewhere.
That's our point of contention.
|
Jonathan Townsend
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
25257 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 19, 2004 10:31am
We might get along better with Marco if we asked him to discuss his perspective.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
chrisrkline
Special user
Little Rock
965 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 19, 2004 3:50pm
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-19 07:51, Marco S. wrote:
Chris, Frank asked for permission and nothing else.
I have never said I steal effects or sleights. The effects I do are tricks other magicians do too. And they are not stolen. By the way, you couldn`t find out anyhow. But I guess you think I am not saying the truth, for a reason I don`t know.
|
|
But if you are not stealing, why do you suppose we do? I define stealing as using an effect that you have not been given permission to perform either directly from the magician or from the purchase of a book or DVD. You have called me a liar.
Quote:
|
To chrisrkline: I don`t have to prove anything here.
If you guys really want to tell me you always contact the originators, [or] always buy the books to have a clean conscience, etc. there is no need to prove this [I don’t have to; that is what I do--Chrisrkline]. Who is going to believe this?
|
|
I don’t steal and I never said you steal. I simply stated that, by our standards, you either steal or you don't. If you do, tell us what you use that, we would say, you stole.
For example, if you do the Two-Card Monte and you picked it up watching "Street Magic" five times, then say that. Then explain why that is not stealing.
Every effect I do, I have learned from a book or DVD. Every one. Maybe you think that is stupid, but it is true nonetheless.
Chris
|
kregg
Inner circle
1958 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 19, 2004 6:16pm
Good magician's steal all the time, they just don't get caught... or they put a new face on the trick!
What is abhorrent is the trick of the year. My word, just because a lecturer is teaching and selling their wares doesn't mean the material can't be changed.
POOF!
|
Jonathan Townsend
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
25257 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 19, 2004 7:09pm
Kregg, I don't understand your post. Would you elaborate and maybe give some example so I could understand you better?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
Marco S.
Inner circle
1017 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 20, 2004 8:17am
Kregg, you are absolutely right. At least there is somebody here who says it.
|
chrisrkline
Special user
Little Rock
965 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 20, 2004 10:44am
This is Deja Vu all over again.
Marco I guess magicians steal all the time, except for you. Hmmm....
Fill us in on how you are able to stay so pure.
Chris
|
cloneman
Elite user
474 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 20, 2004 9:44pm
As I've written at length before, you must first distinguish between what is illegal, and what is unethical. In order to do that, you must first understand what the law does and doesn’t protect. To add a bit of legal meat to this argument, and to correct a few misconceptions, I am reprinting below a copy of my article. “Tricky Protection: A Brief Overview of Intellectual Property Protection for Magic Tricks”, published in the June 2004 issue of Magic Magazine. I apologize for the lengthy post, but I genuinely feel magicians need to have something of an understanding of the law before we can have an educated discussion regarding the protection of magic tricks.
~~~~~~~~~
TRICKY PROTECTION: A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION FOR MAGIC TRICKS
(Originally published in the June 2004 issue of Magic Magazine)
Magicians seeking to protect their tricks and routines have a number of legal tools available to them, including copyright law to safeguard their patter and other expressive portions of their acts, and patent and trade secret law to protect their devices and the workings of their magic tricks. But each option has serious limitations and drawbacks that the magician must be aware of.
Hypo: Karloff the Conjurer, magician and inventor extraordinaire, has designed a new trick: “Lip Locker,” a Chinese linking ring effect accomplished with nose and belly button rings. He performed the trick to a standing ovation at a recent magic convention and has been selling his creation online since. Lately, however, his sales have dropped off dramatically. Karloff decides to surf the web to see what other magicians are saying about his trick. Much to his dismay, he finds that his trick has been ripped off by cheap imitators and unscrupulous magic dealers. In the blink of an eye Karloff’s profits have disappeared.
Sound familiar? Although Karloff is hypothetical, his plight is not. As the briefest visit to any online magic forum will show, securing adequate legal protections for tricks is one of the biggest concerns for magic professionals today. This article will explore three branches of American intellectual property law, namely copyright, patent, and trade secret law, and suggest ways in which they may be used to protect a magician's property rights in the tricks, routines, and secrets that he or she creates.
Copyright Protection
Copyright tends to be the first thing that pops into people's minds when they think about legal protections for creative works. For the magician, a copyright can be used to protect much of the artistic expression used to create his or her act (though not the way the trick works).
Example: Maximilian von Zigmund has developed a new stage act in which he tells the tale of the Trojan War, using magic tricks. His costume consists of a toga, and he has written and performed all of the music himself. He has created an original Trojan horse prop to serve as misdirection for the sleight of hand moves he actually uses to accomplish his effects. If Maximilian were to seek protection solely through copyright, he might be able to protect the following, if they are sufficiently creative to be considered “original” under the law: (1) his music, (2) his script and patter—that is, his particular interpretation of the Trojan War, (3) his nonfunctional choreography—any original moves that serve a narrative function, but are not required to perform the sleights which make up the tricks, (4) any sufficiently creative sequence of tricks in his act, (5) the appearance of his Trojan horse and other nonfunctional design elements of tricks, props, and scenery, (6) images of his act and other content on his web site or posters, (7) the images and video content of any instructional DVDs or videos he produces, and (8) the text and images of any book or lecture notes he authors.
Copyright is one of the easiest forms of intellectual property protection to obtain: basically, all you have to do is create an original work and record it. As if by magic, the moment you record your work—write it down, videotape your performance, paint a design on a box, etc. —your copyright instantly appears. You don’t even have to fill out a form or put a “C” in a circle to get copyright protection, it’s automatic (although it is still a good idea to register your copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office, as you have greater legal protections when you do). As a general rule, in the United States an author's copyright lasts until 70 years after his or her death.
A copyright gives the owner the exclusive right to take his or her work and make copies of it, distribute it, perform that work publicly, publicly display the work, or make derivative works based upon the original work. Anyone else who tries to do those things with the copyrighted work without the owner’s permission infringes the copyright and may be sued by the copyright owner.
While there are a lot of things of copyright will protect, there's an awful lot that it won't. Copyright will generally not protect inventions, methods, and processes, facts and theories, names, titles or short phrases, and any work in the public domain or in which the copyright has expired. Copyright will not protect scènes à faire, which is a fancy legal French way of describing the common conceits typical of an artistic genre: no matter how original your routine may be, you're not going to be able to protect the concept of pulling a rabbit from a hat or using a magic wand.
Undoubtedly, the biggest limitation on copyright protection for magicians is that it will not protect the key element of the magician's work: the magician's secrets and methods. This is because, while copyright protects expressed artistic work, it will not protect any of the ideas behind these works. The U.S. statutes are quite specific on this point: “In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.” In other words, if it’s a process, method, or idea that you’re seeking to protect, don’t turn to copyright law for help.
A unique method of palming a coin, for instance, is not protectable by copyright law, despite the fact that the magician may have written a detailed book on the subject and registered the book’s copyright with the U.S. Copyright Office in Washington, D.C. Nor is it copyright infringement to read that magician’s book and perform the tricks it describes without giving either money or credit to its author.
Additionally, where the patter or presentation is inseparable from the process of doing the trick, that patter may not be protected by copyright. For example, if the magician says: “Please cut the cards, select the top card, look at it, and return it to the deck,” that instructional statement would probably not be protectable, as the words are so intertwined with the trick’s operation. To put it another way: if there are a limited number of ways in which a magician can direct the audience to cut a deck of cards, copyright law will not stop other magicians from giving the same set of instructions.
Example: In Maximilian von Zigmund's “Fall of Troy” act, above, Maximilian would not be able to use copyright law to protect (1) the idea of basing a magic act of the Trojan War, (2) his toga, unless it was covered with an original design or pattern, (3) the ideas or methods behind the magic tricks themselves, or (4) any patter which was functionally inseparable from the execution of the trick, i.e. “Now I will ask my volunteer to open up the gates of Troy and wheel the wooden horse inside the walls of the city.”
Another restriction on copyright protection is the doctrine of “independent creation.” If two artists come up with the same work independently of each other, and neither has copied the others' work, both works will be entitled to copyright protection—even though both works are substantially similar to each other. For a magician, this means that even if you copyright your patter, another magician may use substantially similar patter if they can prove they didn't copy yours.
Not being able to protect the methods and processes of a magic trick makes copyright law only a partial solution for the magician/inventor. In order to secure protection for the method or process behind a magic trick, a magician may want to turn to patent law.
Patent Protection
In many ways, patent law is the ideal form of protection for a magic trick. It is stronger than copyright law in two important respects: unlike a copyright (1) a patent will protect processes and methods, and (2) a patent owner may stop anyone else from making, selling, or using his patented trick, even if the new user independently developed the same trick without knowledge of the preexisting patent. American magicians have availed themselves of patent protection since at least the early 20th century, with subject matter ranging from the box that produces the illusion of sawing a lady in half to a simulated rotating finger illusion.
The two “flavors” of patents magicians are chiefly concerned with are utility patents and design patents. A utility patent, which lasts for 20 years, provides a monopoly on new and useful inventions, processes, machines, and compositions of matter or improvements on the same, whereas a design patent, which lasts for 14 years, protects nonfunctional ornamental designs.
In order to qualify for utility patent protection, an invention must be (1) useful: it must confer some benefit, (2) novel: it must be new as of the date the inventor conceived it or when the patent application was filed, and (3) non-obvious: that is, the invention must not be obvious to a hypothetical person of “ordinary skill in the art” – in other words, in order for this new magic trick to be patentable, it must be an unexpected or surprising development to ordinary magicians and magic prop builders.
Example: Sandy Spades is a master of both the pasteboards and of computer science. She has developed a new method of splitting the back of a playing card and inserting a paper-thin microchip of her own design. This microchip can relay a signal to a hidden receiver, secretly notifying a magician of the card's location in the deck. As if this weren’t impressive enough, Sandy has also come up with an original method of forcing the card. Sandy may be able to patent (1) the microchip design, (2) the process of splitting the back of the card, and (3) the method of forcing the card. If Sandy is able to secure patents for all of the above, she will be able to prevent (a) other American companies from selling similar microchip designs, even if those manufacturers were unaware of her patent, and (b) other magicians from using her card splitting and forcing methods in their acts.
Unfortunately, patents are also one of the hardest forms of intellectual property to obtain; unlike a copyright, a patent involves a significant amount of governmental review before it is granted. The process is far from automatic, and there are a number of reasons the government may deny the patent.
Patents may be denied if the invention in question is too similar to, or anticipated by, previous inventions (known as the “prior art”). This makes patent protection somewhat difficult to achieve for magicians, because many of today’s sleights are minor variations of moves invented long ago. Even Robert-Houdin and Erdnase based a good portion of their sleights on the conjuring and gambling moves of those who went before them. The slight change in finger position when palming a coin might not be nonobvious enough to transform public domain sleights into patentable material.
In addition to nonobviousness, one of the more significant hurdles a magician must leap over in gaining patent protection is the one-year restriction against the public use or sale of the invention prior to filing for patent protection. Once the magician-inventor publicly discloses his invention, a legal clock starts ticking. The inventor has one year from that point to file a patent application, or he or she may forever lose the right to receive patent protection. It is important to note that a public or commercial performance alone may start the clock, even though the magician never actually disclosed the secret behind how the trick works.
Patents and the attorneys who secure them are not cheap; one can expect to spend thousands of dollars on even the simplest patent. In order for the inventor to recoup his or her investment, a magician must create a trick that other magicians or magic dealers will pay handsomely for. As a result, patent protection is usually used for high-end stage illusions, priced in the hundreds to thousands of dollars. Typically, the patent holder will sell a patented trick to a magician, along with a license to perform it, but does not sell or license the ability to manufacture the trick commercially.
The biggest drawback to patent protection for magicians is that the inventor must fully disclose the secrets behind the patented trick. The public has free access to all of the inner workings of every patented invention: all one needs to do is visit the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office website and conduct a simple search. Since disclosure of magical secrets is what most magicians are trying to avoid, they must think carefully before seeking this kind of protection. While a patent is in many ways the strongest form of intellectual property protection, it is also the one with the most limited duration: 14 or 20 years. It may not be worthwhile for a magician to disclose her trick to the public in exchange for a 14 or 20 year monopoly on the effect. If potentially perpetual secrecy is important to the conjurer, a magician may want to turn to the law of trade secrets.
Trade Secret Protection
The Uniform Trade Secrets Act defines a trade secret as confidential information which is: (1) economically valuable because it is secret, (2) NOT generally known or ascertainable through legal methods, and (3) the subject of reasonable efforts to keep the information confidential. The classic example of a trade secret is the formula for Coca-Cola, a recipe purportedly kept in a bank vault somewhere in Atlanta, Georgia, and known only to a handful of top executives in the company. Other common examples of trade secrets include customer lists and business processes and procedures. Patents and trade secrets are mutually exclusive: a patent registration, by necessity, exposes the secret workings of a trick.
In order to protect trade secrets, the holder of the confidential information should require anyone who is privy to the secrets to sign a nondisclosure agreement (“NDA”). An NDA is a contract that requires the parties to keep confidential the trade secrets covered by the agreement: a party who breaches an NDA is financially (and potentially criminally) liable to the trade secret owner. A well-drafted NDA may be an effective device for a magician to use to prevent assistants and prop builders from shopping the magician’s secrets to another conjurer. Magic trick builders may also benefit from NDAs that prevent a magician-customer from disclosing the builder’s secrets.
In short, to protect trade secrets you have to keep them confidential, and you have to get others to agree to keep your confidences as well.
Example: Magic Wanda has invented a new handling for “Scotch and Soda,” the classic coin trick in which two coins are shown, one copper, the other silver, and the copper coin is made to vanish right in front of the spectators eyes. In order for her new method to be protected as a trade secret, she should: (1) take reasonable steps to protect access to the confidential portions of her routine, and (2) ensure that those who need to be made aware of her trade secrets are under contract with her not to divulge those confidences. She might do this by clearly marking “Confidential Information” on any materials that she passes out to her assistants and by making all of her assistants sign NDAs in which they agree not to divulge her secrets.
Doesn’t sound too hard does it? At first glance, it appears as if all a magician has to do to gain trade secret protection is keep his or her mouth shut and make sure that all of his or her assistants sign NDAs. Unfortunately for magicians like Magic Wanda, there is a wrinkle to the law that may deny her trade secret protection for her new routine, even if she does take reasonable steps to protect its secrecy. This legal trap is sprung when a magician attempts to protect confidential information which is known to other magicians or readily ascertainable by other magicians. To return to our hypothetical: if Wanda has revolutionized “Scotch and Soda” simply by adding the “French Drop,” a common magicians’ sleight-of-hand technique, and one whose handling would be apparent to any conjurer who saw her act, she may not have a protectable trade secret—despite any steps that she may have taken to keep her handling under wraps, and despite any nondisclosure agreements she may have had her assistants sign (although in some jurisdictions she might be able to sue them for a breach of a duty of loyalty). Furthermore, unless somebody signs a nondisclosure agreement to the contrary, it is not a violation of trade secret law to "reverse engineer" a magic trick.
Example: Melissa the Magnificent creates an illusion in which a computer is made to vanish in much the same way as the well-known “Vanishing Birdcage” trick. Because the method is so similar to the birdcage illusion, Melissa may not be able to patent her trick. She chooses instead to protect it as a trade secret, making all of her assistants sign NDAs. So far so good. In need of money, she sells her illusion to another performer, Otto the Unscrupulous, without the benefit of an NDA. Now she’s got problems: Otto may pull apart the illusion he bought, reverse engineer it, and use the concepts he's discovered in creating and selling his own version of Melissa's illusion without compensating Melissa or violating trade secret law. Otto must still be careful not to infringe any of Melissa's copyrights in the nonfunctional design elements of Melissa's illusion. While Otto's behavior may be legal, it is certainly unethical behavior and a violation of the membership regulations of many magicians’ societies.
Unlike the short shelf life of a patent, trade secret protection is potentially perpetual—that is, it lasts as long as you, and others, can keep the secret.
Sewing It All Together
Because each branch of intellectual property law is designed to protect something slightly different from the others, the best course of action for a magician is to work with his attorney to hammer out a legal strategy that incorporates more than one of the doctrines discussed above. Think of Russian nesting dolls: one legal protection stacked inside another.
Example: “The Amazing Artemus Anubis, Sword Swallower of Distinction,” has perfected a new method of swallowing a pool cue and a ball, a trick he calls “Ate Ball.” His new technique incorporates innovative handling and a revolutionary gimmick of his own design. Anubis now wants to make and sell the gimmick as well as an instructional CD-ROM/DVD on how to use it. Anubis’ attorney might advise him to (1) apply for a utility patent for both the gimmick and the handling, (2) file a copyright registration for the nonfunctional elements of choreography and handling, (3) apply for a design patent for the nonfunctional design elements of the gimmick, (4) register the trademark logo and slogans for “Ate Ball,” and (5) create a click-wrap agreement which may prevent the DVD from being played unless someone agrees to an NDA, protecting the non-patentable elements of the trick as a trade secret. Like the overlapping pieces of a suit of armor, patent, copyright, and trade secret law intersect and complement each other, creating a strong mesh of property rights for Anubis, his tricks, and his routine.
Intellectual property is complex: premature disclosure, sale, or public performance of a trick may erode a magician/inventor’s legal rights. A brief article like this one can only outline some of the legal issues. Prior to performing or selling a new trick or routine, a magician should consider consulting an attorney experienced in both entertainment and intellectual property law for legal guidance. Like a good magician’s assistant, the right attorney can help you sell a trick while keeping its secrets protected.
*****
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR EDUCATIONAL AND INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE OR A LEGAL OPINION. ONLY YOUR ATTORNEY CAN ADVISE YOU WHICH LAWS ARE APPLICABLE TO YOUR SPECIFIC CASE AND SITUATION.
"Anything is possible... if you don't know what you are talking about."
|
Marco S.
Inner circle
1017 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 21, 2004 8:58am
Posted: Oct 21, 2004 9:01am
----------------------------------------
Chris I am talking about moves and sleights , you are talking about complete tricks. That is a big difference.
If a trick is just a move or so, then it is a sleight to me, but maybe a trick to you. Who knows? But you can certainly not say that a double lift, for example, is a trick in itself.
|
Jonathan Townsend
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
25257 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 21, 2004 9:06am
The some folks do double lifts, they seem to be fooling themselves <g>.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
Open Traveller
Inner circle
1087 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 21, 2004 9:22am
Well, Marco, we've covered the propriety (or non-propriety) of moves and sleights already, so you seem to be having a different conversation than the rest of us. But even some moves should be left alone, don't you think, especially if the originator of the move clearly doesn't want it spread around?
And then there are specific combinations of moves to achieve a certain effect; i.e. methods. Same thing.
And then there are routines. Same thing.
And plots. Same thing.
And presentations. No different, huh?
|
Matt Bartz
Loyal user
Gilbert, Arizona
248 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 21, 2004 11:14am
Facinating article Thomas.
Everyone should take the time to read it. I love that you wrote it in a manner that you don't need a law degree to understand the message.
|
Marco S.
Inner circle
1017 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 21, 2004 11:18am
Well Open Traveller, how can anybody be the proprietor of a double lift, or a top change, or a top palm?
And how do YOU contact them???
By the way, you read my last post wrong again. It seems you only read what you want to read.
|
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Is it Stealing? » » TOPIC IS LOCKED |
|
|
| Go to page (Previous) 1 ~ 2 ~ 3 ~ 4 ~ 5 ~ 6 ~ 7 ~ 8 ~ 9 ~ 10 (Next) |
|
![[8]](/forums/images/digits/8.gif)
![[1]](/forums/images/digits/1.gif)
![[7]](/forums/images/digits/7.gif)
![[6]](/forums/images/digits/6.gif)
![[4]](/forums/images/digits/4.gif)