|
|
Vision Veteran user London 395 Posts |
Hello Guys!
This is an excerpt from my book, not yet published though. It poses an interesting view on the issue of piracy. Enjoy it! "Another hot issue nowadays is piracy and exposure. Oooh, the bad people with eye patches and peg legs, maybe a hook instead of hand. I do NOT support piracy; it’s illegal due to the copyright law. Pay respect where respect is due. On the other hand I sometimes understand the pirates; TOO much **** is released all the time, such as myriads of e-books, most of them not worth the few kilobytes they occupy on my hard drive. I only buy books I know I would be proud to have on my bookshelf (although I can’t control myself at all times). I do admit to have fallen for the impulse to buy heaps of e-books on more than one occasion too. If something is worth reading it’s put out in hard copy. E-books are for optimized profit only, therefore I don’t trust them. The best stuff is out of print. So what do you do? Are you just going to buy that one book worth having, that they put out once a year? Or will you buy loads of e-books and waste your money? You probably will. These ethical people who serve to protect our art, are they really as good as they portray themselves? In short: No. The long answer: Look at TRI, all those members whether doing it themselves or not, was participating in an affair of piracy. The Super Sharpie was clearly exposed in text and pictures. That is BAD, whether it’s a closed forum or not. I also know that mine and James’ precious baby Cerebro was openly discussed as well. IF you would be a member of an organisation endorsing such behaviour, you ARE giving them your support and agreement in their views and actions, even if indirectly. TRI did close down. Ask yourself, how does that behaviour differ from a person sending a copy of a book for free to his friend? If I’m just lending a book to my friend, is that piracy too? He’s learning the secrets without paying for them after all. Have you ever done that? I know for a fact that several “names” openly discuss methods behind different products that are out on the market, are these people then paying their respect by buying said product? I doubt it. Then there’s the “ethical” pirate, who would only pirate out of print stuff. Fair enough, in order to elevate our art, we can’t keep reinventing the wheel. We NEED to stand on the shoulders of giants. That’s the only way, albeit not necessarily the right and honest one. I know that by writing this I’m allowing myself to be a target, people might come down on me saying that I am a pirate too. Spare yourself the trouble and wasted time. I’m not. I’m merely the devils advocate, posing an argument for the pirates, since no one will listen to them. It’s hard to defend yourself if you’re on the wrong side of the fence, you know. Now I want to leave you with something to ponder. If you’re going to be ethical, be consistent. You can’t choose to be against just certain forms of piracy. So…on your computer, have you paid for all that software? You haven’t received anything from your friends, have you? Did you ever copy a movie you rented, just because you really liked it? Do you remove your legal mp3’s within 24 hours? Has your trial version of Winzip expired yet? Get real…" Sincerely, Daniel Young
www.awonderfulmind.blogspot.com
check it out for new products. |
BonzoTheClown Regular user 176 Posts |
Not the best written piece I've seen on the subject. Anyway if you are really writing a book I hope you get a copy editor.
Quote:
These ethical people who serve to protect our art, are they really as good as they portray themselves? In short: No. The long answer: Look at TRI, all those members whether doing it themselves or not, was participating in an affair of piracy. The Super Sharpie was clearly exposed in text and pictures. That is BAD, whether it’s a closed forum or not. I also know that mine and James’ precious baby Cerebro was openly discussed as well. IF you would be a member of an organisation endorsing such behaviour, you ARE giving them your support and agreement in their views and actions, even if indirectly. TRI did close down. Were you ever a TRI member? It guess not. Probably best not to talk about what you don't know or have just picked up from gossip and rumour. Personally myself, when buying something, I do not feel I am buying something as intangible as a 'secret'. I buy the right to use it. If something is unusable, cheap or shody, is designed in such a way that the gaff is only useable by some people, doesn't stand up to the pressures of regular use, has something that will affect the way the rest of a show is put together then I personally want to know about it. If I didn't know then my money is being wasted on something. I want to know if I can use something and whilst I can sit and pretty much devise a method of achieving any effect, I do not have the production capabilities or time to manufacture much of what I need. Now the reason that discussion of something like the Sharpie (whether or not it was I don't know) wouldn't have been such a bad thing is that unlike the Café the TRI was not open to the public to read. Every part of the Café, like it or not, is. Even the 'secret sections'. Exposure is revealing to the public (the definition of public could also encompass a lot of newcomers of magic and related arts) not to other performing mentalists, or magicians. This should not harm anything except the pockets of the creator IF their product is no good. This wouldn't work somewhere like the Café, because unlike the TRI the membership here does consist largely of people who buy things to find out how they work - the secret hunters. If it isn't exposure, is it piracy? Well I believe not. When you're talking about something like the Sharpie. You have to physically own the thing to use it. It's not like buying a book, rephrasing it in your own words. The gaff is the secret, and without it you can't use it. Marc Climens |
christopher carter Special user 660 Posts |
Quote:
On 2004-12-16 09:52, Vision wrote: Cerebro was not discussed in the manner you are intimating, and you know it yourself because you possess the thread. Quote:
So…on your computer, have you paid for all that software? Yes, I have Quote:
You haven’t received anything from your friends, have you? I was sent unsolicited stuff, once, and I immediately deleted it, then promptly notified the individual pirated. Quote:
Did you ever copy a movie you rented, just because you really liked it? No, I haven't. Quote:
Do you remove your legal mp3’s within 24 hours? Don't have any. Quote:
Has your trial version of Winzip expired yet? Get real…" I have a paid-for version of Winzip. If your post is to play devil's advocate on the part of pirates, it fails. It fails because you make no effort to define the perameters of piracy, or to distinguish between traditional definitions of "fair use" and copyright infringement. There is no argument, per se, just ramblings. I am told there are CDs available with most published mentalism books. I don't have such a thing, nor will I knowingly associate with somebody who does. Until you can make a distinction between this sort of activity and friends discussing ideas amongst themselves, you haven't really said anything of value. I notice that you have taken rather great lengths to legally protect your Cerebro device. Obviously you are aware of the dangers of piracy. I wouldn't have blabbed even if I hadn't signed anything. How about you? --Chris |
Lord Of The Horses Inner circle 5406 Posts |
According to what I knew, TRI members were "raccoon hatters" and not pirates.
But, seriously now, let the dead rest in piece. No need to disturb TRI sleep... You don't want to run the risk of waking it up with a kiss... or do you? TRI is dead! Long Live to TRI!
Then you'll rise right before my eyes, on wings that fill the sky, like a phoenix rising!
|
Vision Veteran user London 395 Posts |
First of all, that's a rough draft from something that might be published. I am swedish after all I will take your criticism and revise where necessary. It is ramblings, never did I intend it as anything else.
Im not blaming anybody for any kind of behaviour, I was posing a different view on a subject that's all. Bonzo, I know very well what Im talking about. Lets take an impression pad, you can construct it yourself, but when you buy it you get the pad and all. Just like the case with Shrink's IA and M+ Janus Pad. What if that was discussed, with pictures and all. So then people could just make it up themselves, what then? Im not saying you would rip it off, but others might. How come that if you are closed group of people you are allowed to expose secrets? Of course it's better to be a closed group than places like the Café. It still doesn't justify the actions, does it? Regarding S.Sharpie, people said that it was easy to make and that they could build a better one. Doesn't that imply something? C. Carter: I never said people talked about it in detail, just openly. And yes, I do possess quotes from said thread. I wasn't attacking you, you seem to be a really honest guy and I respect you. Even more so, considering that most people do have pirated software and mp3's etc. If I would buy something, I wouldn't open my mouth about it, since it devalues whatever I bought. If I got a really nifty thing, such as Cerebro, I wouldn't tell every magician about it, because I would have much more fun without them knowing a thing. Anyway, I was just posing a different view on this subject. I don't want no bad blood between any of us. Sincerely, Daniel Young
www.awonderfulmind.blogspot.com
check it out for new products. |
Lord Of The Horses Inner circle 5406 Posts |
Daniel, I follow you and partially agree with what you say, to a point. But here is my problem. First of all, we don't need to speak about Cerebro since you do for us. Thus I will probably end up not being the only one performing it.
Also, if what you said it's true, why you did not keep that nifty thing for yourself? Probably - and it's just my assumption that may as well be flawed as yours is - because you value money making more than exclusivity. Thus, do you find so strange that *personally* I value more knowing what I buy before buying it, rather than throwing my money out of the window for some gimmick that could be a piece of crap? I don't. But we have to agree to disagree then. As you said, no bad blood. Fine with me!
Then you'll rise right before my eyes, on wings that fill the sky, like a phoenix rising!
|
Vision Veteran user London 395 Posts |
Someone that understood my intention, thank you Paolo! I knew I could trust you
We were close to never releasing Cerebro, but then there's the money issue and pride, getting that bit of recognition. Why do people really publish things in the first place? We decided to balance the whole exclusivity/profit issue by pricing it the way we did. My point which you said as well: You want to know what you are buying if you're not sure about it. So do I. But being told what it is counts as exposure in some peoples books. In this jungle of crap being released, it's hard. If I see Banachek releasing something, I will buy it, because I know who he is. However, if I release something, people don't know me, they don't know if what I release is any good. Of course they will want to find out what Im about. I don't blame them. By point is the whole two faced issue, none of us want exposure, but we DO want to know what we're buying beforehand. A bit contradictory. //Daniel
www.awonderfulmind.blogspot.com
check it out for new products. |
christopher carter Special user 660 Posts |
If part of Daniel's point is that nobody is perfect, or that humility is a virtue, both are valuable points to be made.
I am not at liberty to discuss a secret organization in detail, but I will add that it has been frequently mischaracterized and speculations have been posted as if they were truth. This is not to say that the group was without its faults. As Paolo says, it's dead now. I was talking with an extremely creative writer of mentalism books who was explaining to me that, sure, he knew that people would share ideas from his books amongst themselves. That didn't bother him; in fact, he seemed to encourage it. What did bother him was the fact that complete electronic copies of his works were being shared. Failure to distinguish between these two levels of activity is like failing to distinguish between murder and not paying a parking meter. You might say, "we're all pirates." Sure, and we're all sinners, too. But we don't all sin the same sins, and the differences are crucial. --Chris |
Vision Veteran user London 395 Posts |
I really agree with your friend. I know very well that whatever I will put out, will be talked about between friends. That's fair enough, I know there's nothing I can do. And if people discuss it amongst themselves it must have SOME value.
I know that very small releases of various stuff that I've created have been "pirated", and sent around. The action itself didn't bother me THAT much, it was the fact that I wasn't even credited that did. Regarding TRI, my main point had nothing to do with TRI and in retrospect might not be a good idea to bring it up, since it is, as you put it, dead. I do not wish to paint it as an evil organisation, it was far from. I just think certain liberties were taken. Sincerely, Daniel Young
www.awonderfulmind.blogspot.com
check it out for new products. |
John LeBlanc Special user Houston, TX 524 Posts |
Quote:
On 2004-12-16 10:46, Vision wrote: But you made broad, generalized statements and indicted your readers with them. I disagree that "most people" have pirated software or illegal MP3s on their computers. (I would agree, however, that many people who state things like that often are projecting their own experience on others.) Arguing from the point of view that people, in general, are hypocrites and going on to attempt to "prove" that using generalizations is not very useful or compelling. All generalizations are bad. Quote:
If I would buy something, I wouldn't open my mouth about it, since it devalues whatever I bought. If I got a really nifty thing, such as Cerebro, I wouldn't tell every magician about it, because I would have much more fun without them knowing a thing. Well, that's certainly your choice and I don't think there's any good point in arguing about it. On the other hand, other people, when they find a trick that they particularly like, they feel compelled to share their excitement by discussing it with their friends and peers, and maybe even suggesting the purchase one. The concept of keeping things to yourself because you don't want others performing it is an interesting choice to make. it presupposes that everyone will do the trick exactly as written up -- including you. By the way, that discussion of a new trick doesn't necessarily have to include describing in detail the methodology. John LeBlanc |
johne Special user 960 Posts |
Biblically speaking there are no differences in sins...murder and not paying your parking ticket are not differentiated
The point was brought up at one time, that private discussion about products were OK, to see if a particular product was right for a particular person or not. The point was also discussed that not everyone in these groups were not performers. Is it wrong for them to be included in these private discussions. The reason for non-refundable magic was...you're buying the secret. Thus the secrets being openly discussed should be viewed as a free exchange of purchased material. |
Lord Of The Horses Inner circle 5406 Posts |
Ok, my last post on the subject... (I enjoy this chat, BELIEVE ME GUYS! But it's getting recursive! Like if there is no next-step function! )
You see, again we are in "Meaningland". What if those "liberties" that you seem to connotate as a - were instead a + for some forums? I mean, you may not agree, but it's just because you give another meanng and probably have another gut reaction to that... that's all. Plus, your forum will have your rules that, if you are congruent, will then BLOCK such liberties. My forum has my rules. If I set up a forum and, among its reasons to exist, one is for taking those "liberties" because I really believe they are a positive thing, it would be then insane, or at least ludicrous, on my part to then trying to stop those liberties... Sure, people could hate me, criticize me, whatever... but I will continue along MY chosen road, not theirs...
Then you'll rise right before my eyes, on wings that fill the sky, like a phoenix rising!
|
Vision Veteran user London 395 Posts |
The truth is that most people have some form of illegal goods at home, such as mp3, at least if you look at younger people, for the older generation a copied VHS etc. It is a generalisation, of course, but it's a quite accurate one. Since what I wrote wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, there's no need for anyone to feel targeted. And yes, I do have mp3's on my computer that I forgot, but that's not the point.
"The concept of keeping things to yourself because you don't want others performing it is an interesting choice to make. it presupposes that everyone will do the trick exactly as written up -- including you." No it doesn't presuppose that. Of course I don't want people to perform it the way I do it, but it's a very sneaky thing (Cerebro), hence I don't want everybody to know about it. I could have chosen to fry magicians "all over the world" with it, me and James decided to release it as a limited effect. Don't read into things too much... Sincerely, Daniel Young Thank Johne for condensing my point even further! Im off for a walk, lets see what has happened to this thread when Im back See you later! //Daniel
www.awonderfulmind.blogspot.com
check it out for new products. |
John LeBlanc Special user Houston, TX 524 Posts |
Quote:
On 2004-12-16 11:27, Lord Of The Horses wrote: This presupposes those "liberties" are fundamentally sound and ethical to begin with. But what if those "liberties" are fundamentally wrong? Just because you think a thing is fine does not necessarily mean it is fine. That's the religion of relativism, and that doesn't fit in well-formed society. It is a rationalized form of anarchy. Public review of the actions of others is useful in determining right from wrong. I, too, enjoy these exchanges. John LeBlanc |
christopher carter Special user 660 Posts |
Quote:
On 2004-12-16 11:22, johne wrote: You obviously didn't attend Catholic school In any case, I'm lucky to not be bound by theology. It frees me up to work in the practical world. To suggest that there are never times when sharing is appropriate, or that there are nevery any shades of gray, is simply unrealistic. I have belonged to some groups where far too much time has been devoted to declaring who is an exposer and who isn't. It gets pretty tedious after a while. The opposite extreme is pretending that all dissemination of secrets is ethically identical. The only reason for this argument that I can see is to excuse simple and obvious piracy by stating "everybody's doing it." It doesn't wash with me. --Chris |
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » The very evil pirates » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (0 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |