(Close Window)
Topic: Doing tricks you havent paid for?
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (May 17, 2016 03:28AM)
Is there any sort of consensus of the ethicality of performing tricks you haven't directly paid the creator for?

Consider the following situations below and let me know if you think it 'fair' or 'not' (and add why if you're so inclined!):


a) Your mentor teaches you a trick that has been around forever and no one knows whose it is. He bought a book to learn it, but you haven't.

b) Your friend teaches you a currently marketed trick that isn't his. He learnt it from another friend, and so on.

c) You borrow a magic book from a local library, or magic club library, and learn a trick from it before returning it.

d) Your friend lends you a magic DVD. You learn a trick from it before returning it.

e) You reverse engineer a trick you see at a performance.
Message: Posted by: Danny Kazam (May 18, 2016 05:11PM)
I don't believe there is. The magic community has become too big and diverse to expect everyone to all have the same belief system, morals and ethics. There are some cases a majority will agree on, and other issues the majority will not agree on.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (May 19, 2016 12:22AM)
True. Which way do you think the majority would go with the above scenarios?
Message: Posted by: M. Tesla (May 25, 2016 01:05PM)
A) You can do the trick.
B) You'll probably do the trick if you like it, like most others do, whether it's right or wrong.
C) You can do the trick.
D) You'll probably do the trick if you like it, like most others do, whether it's right or wrong.
E) You'll probably do the trick if you like it, like most others do, whether it's right or wrong.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (May 26, 2016 03:34AM)
Cheers Tessler :)

Do you think it is wrong?
Message: Posted by: Michael Daniels (May 26, 2016 04:33AM)
IMO,

a) OK to perform.

b) If you are going to perform it, buy it (but your friend shouldn't have taught you it in the first place).

c) OK to perform.

d) If you are going to perform it, buy it. If it's not currently available, and the creator is still alive, ask for permission. If the creator is dead, don't perform it unless you can significantly improve the presentation or method. If it was a signature effect, don't perform it at all unless you can buy the rights.

Mike
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (May 26, 2016 06:05AM)
Thanks Michael :)

I'm not sure I follow your reasoning behind c being ok, but not d. Aren't they pretty much the same scenario?
Message: Posted by: Michael Daniels (May 26, 2016 08:43AM)
Sorry, I skipped (d). I'll try again.

a) OK to perform.

b) If you are going to perform it, buy it (but your friend shouldn't have taught you it in the first place).

c) OK to perform (but see note below).

d) If you are going to perform it, buy it.

e) If you are going to perform it, buy it. If it's not currently available, and the creator is still alive, ask for permission. If the creator is dead, don't perform it unless you can significantly improve the presentation or method. If it was a signature effect, don't perform it at all unless you can buy the rights.

Note: You could also argue that (c) if you borrow a book from a library, you should buy it (if available) before performing it. Personally, I'd be in favour of that (and usually do). But libraries are, by definition, loaning repositories, so this is rather different from (d) a friend lending you a book or DVD.

Mike
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (May 26, 2016 11:45AM)
That's much clearer, cheers Michael :)
Message: Posted by: M. Tesla (May 27, 2016 09:13AM)
[quote]On May 26, 2016, Terrible Wizard wrote:
Cheers Tessler :)

Do you think it is wrong? [/quote]

I think A and C are okay (you can argue that C is in some form of public domain, as much is learned by new magicians from the books in libraries, and that's because the books you want later, after you've learned a bit, are not going to be found in libraries)...and Mr. Daniels, here, has great answers for B, D, and E, but in almost every example you run afoul of rights to those routines...in almost 60 years of being involved in magic I've seen quite a bit if stealing of material...there's a lot of skeevy magicians out there...and quite a lot that are honest...dunno why we attract so many skeevy ones...added to that, is the concept of buying a trick, to some degree, the inventor/author is giving you the rights to perform it, and sometimes they say to do it just the way they do, but if you adapt a routine to fit your personality then that makes it better...
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (May 27, 2016 09:55AM)
So what is the key difference between performing a trick learnt from a library book, and doing a trick learnt from a book lent by a friend?
Message: Posted by: writeall (May 27, 2016 09:58PM)
There are differences. The library is not your friend. The librarian will penalize you for things like speaking loudly or passing wind. Your friend will just laugh. Also, the library will not help you move.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (May 28, 2016 02:13AM)
All true :).
Message: Posted by: GodSpeed23 (Jun 2, 2016 09:58PM)
A) Okay to perform

B) I say buy the flippin trick

C) Completely okay to perform

D) and E) not so cool at all!

just my opinions.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Jun 3, 2016 12:07PM)
What's the difference between C and D that makes one ok and then other not?
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Jun 3, 2016 12:30PM)
[quote]On Jun 3, 2016, Terrible Wizard wrote:
What's the difference between C and D that makes one ok and then other not? [/quote]

Michael answered that very question and then clarified it even further. You responded by saying that was much clearer and thanked him.

Now you go ahead and ask someone else the same question. Is this really just about stretching out a circular argument as far as possible?
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Jun 3, 2016 01:59PM)
I didn't get a substantive answer from Michael, merely thanked him for clarifying the mistake prior. I didn't expect him to give more since he had opportunity to and didn't, his opinion was that libraries were different. I can't see how. That doesn't preclude me asking others to give them the same opportunity to provide me with more substantive details.

This isn't a circular argument, indeed I don't even know what you mean by that in this context. What exactly is the purpose of your post?

What is the substantive moral difference between doing a trick from a book borrowed from a library, and a book borrowed from a friend? I honestly don't see one at present and would like to understand other people's points of view on this.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Jun 3, 2016 02:05PM)
Let me be clearer.

Micahel provided his opinion. I didn't want to argue, so I didn't ask any follow up questions. Merely thanked him for he clarification. But I didn't find his answer convincin or adequately argued. But fair enough, so what, people disagree all the time. I don't want an argument, merely to hear other people's points of view.

So someone else gives a response to the OP, and I ask them for their reasoning, just as I asked Michael. It would be ridiculous and rude to presume that Micahel spoke for this new participant. Godspeed might have entirely different reasoning behind his POV, or he might just say 'see Michael's post.' Which would be fine. iIts easy really. And nothing circular about it, afaik.
Message: Posted by: M. Tesla (Jun 5, 2016 10:07AM)
You're over-thinking this...
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 5, 2016 10:55AM)
[quote]On Jun 5, 2016, M. Tessler wrote:
You're over-thinking this... [/quote]

Yea par for the course.
Message: Posted by: mastermindreader (Jun 5, 2016 11:59AM)
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.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Jun 5, 2016 12:55PM)
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?
Message: Posted by: M. Tesla (Jun 6, 2016 02:16AM)
[quote]On Jun 5, 2016, Terrible Wizard wrote:
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? [/quote]

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"...
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Jun 6, 2016 03:18AM)
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. :(
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 6, 2016 11:37AM)
Wow.
Message: Posted by: Terrible Wizard (Jun 6, 2016 01:59PM)
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 :)
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 6, 2016 03:44PM)
Wow.
Message: Posted by: paul180 (Sep 14, 2017 07:47PM)
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.
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Sep 15, 2017 09:35AM)
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.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Sep 15, 2017 10:16AM)
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.
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Sep 15, 2017 10:31AM)
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.
Message: Posted by: paul180 (Sep 15, 2017 10:45AM)
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.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Sep 15, 2017 11:13AM)
[quote]On Sep 15, 2017, danaruns wrote:
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. [/quote]

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.
Message: Posted by: danaruns (Sep 15, 2017 05:50PM)
[quote]On Sep 15, 2017, Dannydoyle wrote:
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. [/quote]

I appreciate your grace, but I am in fact President For Life of the NAIAA (National Association of Idiots of America Association). :D 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...
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Sep 15, 2017 06:34PM)
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!
Message: Posted by: Pop Haydn (Sep 28, 2017 05:31PM)
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).
Message: Posted by: The Duster (Oct 2, 2017 06:12PM)
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 [?]
Message: Posted by: WitchDocChris (Oct 3, 2017 08:40AM)
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.
Message: Posted by: magic4545 (Oct 23, 2017 06:39PM)
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.