| Go to page (Previous) 1 ~ 2 ~ 3 ~ 4 ~ 5 ~ 6 ~ 7 ~ 8 ~ 9 ~ 10 (Next) |
|
|
tpdmagic
Elite user
460 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 5, 2004 2:08pm
My theory is simple, If it ain't in print(books, DVD, lecture notes, or magazine) than I don't have the right to perform it.........
|
David Nelson
Elite user
San Mateo, CA
403 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 5, 2004 3:19pm
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-05 07:00, Marco S. wrote:
What this describes is communism and not freedom of mind.
|
|
I would just like to add that what we are espousing here is not communism. In communism the community holds all property, including ideas, and people may use them as they wish. Marco is, in fact, making the vote for communism. I think what he meant is that we were espousing a dictatorship or an oligarchy in which he wouldn't be allowed to do what he wants. If you buy into the idea of intellectual property, that a creator's work is a commodity, then we are talking about straight capitalism and private property. I own what I created, you own what you created and you can't have what's mine unless you get my permission. What we want is that people within a small community, in which there isn't enough money at stake to warrant civil litigation, follow an accepted code of ethics based on the concept of private property. This particular plan does favor creators, as does copyright and trademark law. The reason why most people would favor creators over copiers is that creators, by their nature, create new valuable ideas so we want to support that.
Mr Friedberg while the windows/mac analogy is tempting it doesn't fit your argument. Here's why, the Apple interface that came from xerox was essentially given to them. The apple crew took the idea and added to it creating the Mac interface. Similar to if you are taught a trick by someone, they say they won't use it and you may do as you see fit, so you release your version. With regards to Windows stealing the Mac interface that's touchy and I don't necessarily think you want to be on the side of Bill Gates when you're making an ethical argument  Microsoft's attempt at world domination has caused it to step over the line many times in my opinion. However, the mac interface was already available and for sale, similar to a routine that can be purchased. Then Microsoft made changes, anyone who remembers the first versions of windows knows that this was no Mac interface and then sold their changed version. This is done in our community all the time. In our community, we want the creator to be able to publish first out of deference to their contribution. Currently, because of this commonly held, communist, belief that IP should be available to anyone who can reverse engineer it the government is making more stringent laws. The DMCA is a horrid law that effectively forbids you from even trying to figure out how something works. If magic fell under the category of technology then the DMCA could potentially be invoked. I'm no supporter of the DMCA but it's interesting to see how other industries, in which there is a large financial stake, are handling this. My friend thinks that a creator should own their ideas till they die, I think that a set amount of time is good and then they go into the public domain for the greater good. Disney would have things kept out of the hands of the public forever. There are some grey areas with IP but if you take the "because I want to" argument out of it then there isn't any real argument that supports copying someone else. You stifle your own creative growth, you take the product of their work without any compensation, you potentially stifle other creators who see theft and decide not to even bother, when people see that you take without thinking they will avoid showing you new ideas. I find that lot of ethical arguments become clearer when you remove the "because I want to" argument.
Dave
|
Open Traveller
Inner circle
1087 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 5, 2004 3:56pm
Mr. Townsend seems to accept the idea that his ideas are a commodity. I tend to think of ideas as prized possessions that need to be respected as such by others. It's interesting that these fairly different viewpoints lead to pretty similar outcomes: neither of us will tread on others where we can help it.
Marco's only valid point that I can see is that the appropriation of ideas without regard to ethical concerns leads to progress. To a certain extent, this is true. It definitely leads to progress of certain types (ideas do get worked on, changes and improvements come about, etc.). At the same time, it definitely opposes progress in other arenas, particularly those of human relations. If there's a net progress overall, I think it happens in spite of those who appropriate in this manner rather than because of it.
His analogies, though, often fall short. Copying a basketball star, for instance, is not the same as copying a dance move or a musical composition or a magical presentation, because in the arena of athletics, ideas don't have the same value they do in other venues. In magic, in music...indeed, in any arena where creativity is highly prized, ideas are cherished by a few and absconded with by the rest. Personally, I'd rather be one of those who cherishes rather than one who absconds. It's just a personal choice.
Good post, Dave.
|
Jonathan Townsend
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
25255 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 5, 2004 4:13pm
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-05 15:56, Open Traveler wrote:
Mr. Townsend seems to accept the idea that his ideas are a commodity. ... |
|
Sometimes. Can be offered in trade among peers, with limited use agreements. When taken to print, or sold in material products form.... yes, then the products are commodities, usually exchanged for ordinary social currency = money.
Between published works, and private currency, we have the grey market, sometimes called gossip.
When gossip makes it into print... we have invited another dark age. Every further published embellishment of gossip likely makes the work, and person who created that work, and their associates, much less likely to offer their material for fear of their works becoming gossip as well.
And so, of all the magic folks could be seeing... more and more is left at home instead of going to the conventions and meetings.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
Open Traveller
Inner circle
1087 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 5, 2004 4:21pm
So, what you're proposing, Jonathan, is that if we respected the works of others, if we avoided misappropriating them, if we asked permissions and always worked to ensure the proper claims of others...then it may very well be that magicians and the public would see MORE good and varied magic and not LESS?
Do I understand correctly?
|
Jonathan Townsend
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
25255 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 5, 2004 4:32pm
Staying late at work to write this...
Yes, it seems like a win/win for all involved.
Magicians can feel more comfortable asking for feedback and criticism on works they are developing, thus developing better works more quickly.
These works then go into production for audiences, who get to see the material in performance.
Material that works in performance is more likely to be of interest to the larger community, and so become available in print and/or product.
On the rare occasions that two (or more) people are actually working on the same thing at the same time... more likely to allow for collaboration or at a minimum recognition of each other's efforts.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
Open Traveller
Inner circle
1087 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 5, 2004 4:43pm
I like!
It only seems a natural consequence...when people respect each other and their works, they're more inclined to share with others (who share their respect), and magic as a whole flourishes.
When people misappropriate and operate from a misplaced sense of entitlement, sharing diminishes or stops all together, and the sphere of magic shrinks. Overall progress becomes more difficult. It happens in fits and starts. Any progress that's made tends to be composed of very minor (and often meaningless) variations on what's already there rather than moving smoothly forward because of the combined efforts of the collective braintrust.
|
chrisrkline
Special user
Little Rock
965 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 5, 2004 5:03pm
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-05 07:00, Marco S. wrote:
[snip]
Another argument by Open Traveller is just as inane.
He says if you have the book or so, this is Ok then to do the moves, because the author gave you the right to use his tricks by publishing the book.
Well if you figure the trick out then, but don`t have the book, then you say" well, I know how it works, but I buy the book first, so I have a clean conscience?" BS, big time. Nobody does this. If there is anybody, then sorry to say this, they are completely nuts.
|
|
Nobody does this? Maybe you need to hang around some different people. I do not perform any effect that I do not have explicit or implicit permission to perform. Maybe I am like this because I started as an adult, not a child.
I talked to and saw Bill Palmer perform at our convention in Little Rock the weekend before last. He was very helpful and I learned some things. For various reasons, I could not purchase his lecture notes, although I will sometime.
He went over part of his chop cup routine with me. I am thinking about getting a chop cup myself, but even if I do, I would never perform Bill’s routine without permission.
In a couple of weeks I will perform a short stage show using Whit Haydn’s Mongolian Pop-Knot and a Danny Archer effect, both of which I purchased for that reason. In between effects, I will do a costume change, openly, as a joke. I thought I might do it to music. Mr. Palmer did a wonderful rope bit to music at our convention—and guess what? The music he used is perfect for me. But I will not use that particular selection in my routine. Maybe I am dumb, but I want to be able to talk to Bill again someday and not look like a bloody idiot.
Quote:
|
All you people did that when you were a child. Or do you really want to tell me that you didn`t and tried to contact your idols for permission??? BS again.
If you didn`t, then progress wouldn`t be possible and better players wouldn`t come up later. This has nothing to do with stealing.
|
|
First there are legal questions of copyright and there are ethical questions. Don't confuse the two. There are no ethical concerns over copying Michael Jordan's specific moves, primarily because it is not an issue in sports.
But it is an issue in magic. It is true, that unless you fall under the legal umbrella of copyright law, you are only constrained by ethics. If you choose to watch magicians perform for the purpose of figuring out their tricks, see how long it takes for magicians to stop show you tricks. So if you can’t get magicians to show you their tricks and routines, then what do you have left? You can buy their books or you can pay for their lectures. You can also pay to see them live. But since you don’t seem to want to part with the money, do you sneak into theaters to watch magicians? Do you sneak into lectures? Or do you just watch video on the internet and steal the stuff that way. You may be in you legal rights to do this, but don't expect magicians to help you.
Chris
|
Frank Starsini
Eternal Order
Northern California
12226 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 5, 2004 5:15pm
I wonder how many folks that have created well-known oft-used routines would consider stealing (in this context) to be no big deal?
I wonder how many folks that use anything they want without a thought eventually create well-known oft-used routines or end up performing at venues such as the magic castle or participate in sanctioned competitions?
www.theambitiouscard.com Hand Crafted Magic
Trophy Husband, Father of the Year Candidate,
Chippendale's Dancer applicant, Unofficial World Record Holder.
|
Dave V
Inner circle
Las Vegas, NV
4700 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 5, 2004 5:22pm
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-05 14:08, tpdmagic wrote:
My theory is simple, If it ain't in print(books, DVD, lecture notes, or magazine) than I don't have the right to perform it.........
|
|
I wouldn't go that far. If I was taught something (and given permission to perform it) personally by the inventor, I wouldn't need to see it in print before using it.
However, I think your quote above is accurate if you changed the last words from
"then I don't have the right to perform it" to "then I don't have the right to sell it as my own."
No trees were killed in the making of this message, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
|
Steve Friedberg
Inner circle
1256 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 5, 2004 5:58pm
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-05 15:19, David Nelson wrote:
Mr Friedberg while the windows/mac analogy is tempting it doesn't fit your argument. Here's why, the Apple interface that came from xerox was essentially given to them.
|
|
Dave:
Two points...
1) "Mr. Friedberg" was my father. I'm "Steve," or "goober," or any other name you choose to use.
2) Depend on what history you're reading about the Mac GUI...one man's perceived permission is another's perceived appropriation. (Gee, that sounds strangely familiar here.)
Finally, let me make something clear: I'm not in favor of ripping off ideas. It's something I won't do. (I'm teaching a class in magic later this month, and asked Trini Montes for permission to teach one of his effects. He graciously agreed.) And it's good to see that others on this thread would do likewise. But with the clear understanding that others don't share that thinking, and will appropriate ideas, then you have to make your own decision...will you share your ideas with others? Will you work with those who take others' ideas?
Marco notwithstanding, there are no easy answers here. Never have been...never will be. It's up to each of us to determine our own level of comfort, and to act accordingly.
Cheers,
Steve
"A trick does not fool the eyes, but fools the brain." -- John Mulholland
|
Daegs
Inner circle
USA
4266 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 5, 2004 7:07pm
Quote:
| Daegs, what is the use of contacting the originators if you know how it works? |
|
To get permission to perform and work on the effect.... have I not made that clear?
If you mean how can it benifit you specifially, since you don't seem to care about others, it would let me sleep at night with a clear conscience.
Quote:
| Well if you figure the trick out then, but don`t have the book, then you say "well, I know how it works, but I buy the book first, so I have a clean conscience?" BS, big time. Nobody does this. If there is anybody, then sorry to say this, they are completely nuts. |
|
This is not BS, this is what I personally do, as well as many other magicians. We are not "completly" nuts.
Your main argument seems to be that if others are doing it, then it is ok.
There are plently of people robbing convience stores, and getting away with is, is that ok because other people do it? Are people that pay for gas and cheap snacks "completly nuts"?
Where do you draw the line?
|
Jonathan Townsend
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
25255 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 7:48am
As I recall, the GUI, windows, icons, mouse and pointers were XEROX-PARC stuff and as a publicly funded university project, public property. XEROX has a history of its own for dropping the ball on significant technological achievements.
As to reverse engineering someone's tricks... for your own amusement... sure. For paying performances... not a good practice. For publication of 'variations and improvements'... that is downright insulting.
Is it really that difficult to ask the performer about a trick that you liked?
Most performers and hobbyists I've met have been open about what they are doing and where they found it and often how they developed it.
When it is something they want to keep for themselves... that is their option too.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
Marco S.
Inner circle
1017 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 9:07am
I repeat my previous argument that Jonathan`s comparing my views with somebody who likes touching children is the stupidest post I ever read here. Have it deleted if you want, Jonathan. My opinion won`t change!
Moreover, it really is funny to read how decent all these magicians here are. Calling each other all the time asking for permission, spending loads of money on books containing the one trick they want to do in order to have a clean conscience if they actually perform the trick.
But what is best, they really want to tell me they always acknowledge the inventor of the tricks before performing them, telling people "this move is by Mr. ..., I slightly changed it to fit my performance after I got permission by Mr.... The next trick I do is one by..., whose book I own and who invented this trick in 19..., and this new version was refined by Mr..." and so son.
Who is going to believe this?
|
Open Traveller
Inner circle
1087 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 10:59am
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-06 09:07, Marco S. wrote:
But what is best, they really want to tell me they always acknowledge the inventor of the tricks before performing them, telling people "this move is by Mr. ..., I slightly changed it to fit my performance after I got permission by Mr.... The next trick I do is one by..., whose book I own and who invented this trick in 19..., and this new version was refined by Mr..." and so son.
Who is going to believe this?
|
|
Who here has said they do that?
|
El_Lamo
Special user
Canada
588 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 11:18am
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-03 23:55, edh wrote:
Hello all,
If you watch a magician do a trick and figure out how it is done, is it stealing if you perform it? I am talking about some classic card tricks by well known card magicians.
your thoughts
Edh
|
|
As I understand the question, He is talking about watching well known card magicians perform classic card tricks.
I would assume that the classics are published and not signature pieces. I would also assume that he is not going to perform exactly as the well know card magician.
If someone deconstructs an effect on their own and later performs it, then they are using their own mental processes to do it.
I will get the quote tonight. But one of my magic books talks about a famous magician who would watch an effect. Then, later in the car I believe, worked out variations and possibilities galore.
The Elmsley count is in a book. Do I have to own the book, to perform it?
There does seem to need to be some balance to this discussion.
Cheers - El Lamo
Life is a system of circumstance presented coincidently in an illusory way.
|
Marco S.
Inner circle
1017 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 11:25am
You are right, El_Lamo. This was Ed Marlo who did that I have been told.
Open Traveller, I am not going to help you here. You posted so much "smart stuff" here, you should read the posts over again.
|
Open Traveller
Inner circle
1087 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 11:43am
Marco, your sarcasm helps no one. I guess I should rephrase my previous post. Rather than asking who among us has said what you purport (one way of making the point), I should just clearly say that no one here has made the statement you try to cite.
The discussion is complex enough without you continuing your habit of raising fictitious points.
El_Lamo, edh's original question has been addressed in various ways, but as sometimes happens, numerous side issues have arisen regarding ethics in general. The current debate seems to revolve around two main points: Marco's, which is "whatever I see is mine to take," and another that I and several others have tried to make, which is "no, it's not."
|
chrisrkline
Special user
Little Rock
965 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 11:44am
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-06 11:25, Marco S. wrote:
You are right, El_Lamo. This was Ed Marlo who did that I have been told.
Open Traveller, I am not going to help you here. You posted so much "smart stuff" here, you should read the posts over again.
|
|
It is OK to deconstruct an effect and to work out as many possiblilities that you can. But to perform the effect, you need to get permission. I would guess that Marlo did just that. Most of these magicians saw each other frequently or would write to each other. If Marlo did not do this then he was ethically wrong.
Also, if your whole debate is based on the disbelief that some of us here--many of us--obtain permission to do all of our effects, then your argument fails, because we have already stated that we do. Most of us obtain our "permission" when we buy the effect. Some of us do it by talking to the magician. Novel concept, isn't it?
You can lay off the silly notion that we credit magicians during performances. No one has said they do this and no one has said you needed to.
Chris
|
bigchuck
Veteran user
Nothing clever has ever been said in my
400 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 12:14pm
IMO this thread has been hijacked by either
1. A person who is baiting us & sitting back laughing as we all carry on about this, that, and the other as Mr. Chosse theorized earlier (which I hope is the case).
or
2. A person who is absolutely amoral without regard for other people's creations & who wouldnt even be willing to shell out a couple bucks to give a little back to the guy who is thinking up the stuff that is making him his money.
Either way -- there is no sense wasting time on this convoluted & illogical 'debate' so...
'this thread is dead to me now'
(said in my best Al Pacino impression) 
"The computer can't tell you the emotional story. It can give you the exact
mathematical design, but what's missing is the eyebrows. - Frank Zappa"
|
Marco S.
Inner circle
1017 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 12:14pm
Chrisrkline, you need permission to do a double lift??? Ridiculous!!!
Poor boy!
|
Marco S.
Inner circle
1017 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 12:16pm
You are a "decent guy" Open Traveller. I guess you always tell the truth and never jaywalk, don`t you?
|
Frank Starsini
Eternal Order
Northern California
12226 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 12:17pm
It's very simple.....
All you have to do is quote JonTown's post..
Quote:
|
As to reverse engineering someone's tricks... for your own amusement... sure. For paying performances... not a good practice. For publication of 'variations and improvements'... that is downright insulting.
|
|
There! Those are the rules. I don't think anyone would disagree with those...
But I just read Marco's post on the double-lift. I do a strike double-lift that I think might be called the ... "knockout" double.
I'm not sure. I don't remember when I started doing it this way. I don't remember why. I have not purchased any material on this particular move. I think Martin Nash has something on this. I think it's on Gregory Wilson's Video. But honestly, I'm not sure if that's what I really do. I just don't know and don't remember how it all began. Maybe from here. Beats me.
So.... what should I do???????
www.theambitiouscard.com Hand Crafted Magic
Trophy Husband, Father of the Year Candidate,
Chippendale's Dancer applicant, Unofficial World Record Holder.
|
Open Traveller
Inner circle
1087 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 12:21pm
No permission needed to do a double turnover, Marco. It's in the public domain. It's a free concept. However, if you decide to publish, say, MY particular method of doing a double life without asking me first, we have a little problem with each other.
Am I perfect? I said earlier I'm not. However, as I also said, I still try to hold myself to a higher standard, so at least I'm trying, whereas you apparently are not.
Since we've come to the point where I'm addressing things that were never said and only repeating the things that I did (because apparently you never read them carefully in the first place), I believe there isn't much further we can go from here...
|
Marco S.
Inner circle
1017 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 12:23pm
Well, Frank, in that case, you stole the trick or the move, according to Open Traveller and all the other Samaritans here.
You should contact Greg Wilson immediately and apologize. Then you should transfer some money into his bank account for using this move.
See how stupid this whole thing here is????
|
Marco S.
Inner circle
1017 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 12:25pm
Open Traveller, you didn`t understand a single thing I said, did you???
|
Jonathan Townsend
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
25255 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 12:31pm
Several presuppositions that need to be challenged:
As I understand the question, He is talking about watching well known card magicians perform classic card tricks.
1) How do you decide if someone is well known? Because they were on TV? Once? David Roth did his portable hole and tuning fork routines on TV back LONG ago...
2) How do you decide if an effect or routine is a 'classic'? IMHO you need quite a background to recognize classic plots and the classic handlings as opposed to the recent and more clever handlings and plot twists.
Again, IMHO, If you know enough to recognize what is classic, in the books and open season, you probably already know enough to recognize what is personal to a performer. I encourage you to use your better judgment and ask when you have questions.
How you ask can greatly affect the response you get.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
Marco S.
Inner circle
1017 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 12:33pm
I just read your post Chuck.
You really didn`t read my posts, did you?
Otherwise I cannot understand where you get the notion I ever said I steal tricks?
I am not amoral, I am honest, whereas you guys are hypocritical, when you say you always contact the originator, always buy the books,etc.
Maybe some teenagers are going to believe you, I won`t.
|
Open Traveller
Inner circle
1087 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 12:57pm
Quote:
|
On 2004-10-06 12:33, Marco S. wrote:
Otherwise I cannot understand where you get the notion I ever said I steal tricks |
|
It depends on what you mean by "stealing." Earlier, Reis O'Brien wrote:
Quote:
| If I can see an effect being performed, and immediately figure out how it is done, and then believe it would be a fun effect to perform in my set, then good for me! I'm not going to go out and spend $50 on a book or DVD that teaches it just so I can say I own it and therefore have the right to perform it. |
|
To some of us, that's clearly a platform that advocates stealing. So when you wrote...
Quote:
| Reis O`Brien is right in every way. |
|
...to some of us, that's a pretty clear endorsement for stealing on your part. The rest was derived from your statements supporting the notion that it's ridiculous to have to ask permission to use someone else's idea.
In one last attempt to clarify things for you:
1) It does you no good to bring up examples of common moves such as double lifts or palms, since we've already established that they're common and public concepts that aren't owed to anybody
2) It does you no good to bring up comparisons with other venues, such as athletics, where they place little or no value on the currency of ideas
3) It does you no good to call us hypocrites simply because you don't have the vision to see what we're saying
4) It does you no good to accuse us of things we've never said
5) What we are trying to convey is that you should respect the original ideas of other people where possible, particularly those who feel they have a vested interest in protecting their work in any way.
Finally, I can assure you that if we were to ever meet (and each of us knew who the other was), we would get along very well and there would be no problems.
But I wouldn't show you anything (and I know some really, really neat stuff), because you've already clearly told me you would have no respect for it. You've removed any possible common ground for sharing, so that's the way it will have to be.
So much for the progress in magic, huh?
|
Frank Starsini
Eternal Order
Northern California
12226 Posts
|
Posted: Oct 6, 2004 1:07pm
I'll re-post my question...
Quote:
|
I do a strike double-lift that I think might be called the ... "knockout" double.
I'm not sure. I don't remember when I started doing it this way. I don't remember why. I have not purchased any material on this particular move. I think Martin Nash has something on this. I think it's on Gregory Wilson's Video. But honestly, I'm not sure if that's what I really do. I just don't know and don't remember how it all began. Maybe from here. Beats me.
So.... what should I do???????
|
|
Marco, I didn't "steal" anything from Greg Wilson. It's not his move. Apparently, it might be Martin Nash's move. It also, is not a trick. It's a slight.
Open Traveller? What say you?
JonTown?
www.theambitiouscard.com Hand Crafted Magic
Trophy Husband, Father of the Year Candidate,
Chippendale's Dancer applicant, Unofficial World Record Holder.
|
| 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)
![[6]](/forums/images/digits/6.gif)
![[9]](/forums/images/digits/9.gif)
![[7]](/forums/images/digits/7.gif)
![[5]](/forums/images/digits/5.gif)