To expand this a bit, from my own view, make darn sure it's a legitimate variation. Changing one prop (say, a sandwich for a pizza), using the same effect and same method, is wrong without permission, regardless of crediting (yes, this exact example happened to me when a well known and slightly infamous mentalist included his "variation" of my published effect in his lecture notes).



Also, while you don't have to ask permission for a legit variation, if you can do it, it's a nice gesture.

And here we find out two things: (A)There's a big difference between ethics and laws. Just because something's legal doesn't mean it's right. (B)Never knowingly perform something you don't want pilferred with Jim Passe in the audience :o)

Ah, Andy, Andy, Andy...



You are a sharp young man!

HI,

I must point out that Mr Pass'e wrote the artical as a lawyer and not as a personal point of veiw.



Andy said;



"To expand this a bit, from my own view, make darn sure it's a legitimate variation. Changing one prop (say, a sandwich for a pizza), using the same effect and same method, is wrong without permission"





And what of competition trading rights?

What if the guy that invented the motor car had the right to withhold permision for anyone else to make it up and sell it or any variation without his permission?



What if the guy that first came up with the idea of renting video tapes had the same rights as you are suggesting? Would he then be able to stop others from also renting dvds, cds, cars, airplanes?



phillip

Surely the inventor must want you to see and perform what they have to offer if they are putting it out for all to see either in lecture form, notes or video.



I have seen problems like this in the past.I am friends with Rob Bromly whom has explained to me in the past about difficulities he has had with people copying his material and marketing it, his biggest problem is in the states.



Even though he sends a lot of orders over, there are people over there that also manufacture cheap imitations of what he does.



He said that this don't bother him too much because he still gets regular orders from customers who want the original deal, not the imitation stuff.



I suppose you could ask a simlar question.....would you buy an original c.d. or a bootleg copy? It could fall into the same catagory I think.



But myself, I would have a big problem with other people nicking my ideas and claiming them as there own ideas.





_________________

Thanx Lee



" Dogs do tricks ".......



leepalmer@orange.net

Tom Cutts, where do swapmeets/carboot sales/second hand stores, or even libraries come into all of this? Sure, libraries buy books…nope, some books are donated, and not always by the author or publisher.



I think I gotta go a long with Peter on this one. If I buy, say a Steven King book, used, or knew and I enjoy reading, it I will most certainly pass it on to a friend that I know will like it.

My post earlier didn't turn out too clear as only a part of the quote from mumblepeas made it to the forum. The jist of it was that he saw the video, figured out the effect and built his own.



But he would not perform it without at least buying the plans (and performance rights) from Steve Fearson.



That was the point I was trying to make.

Great Topic!



Grey areas: just because it is grey, doesn't mean it's okay!



Libraries, swap meets, etc.: Although an argument can be made against used magic books, I think it goes beyond reasonableness (sp?). Libraries are there, used books are there, and every other industry deals with them. Magic will, too. Maybe I'm just biased because I buy a lot of used books!







Reading books like Apocalypse can be great for gaining insight into this stuff (Harry has some long sections on crediting material). Getting your idea "in print" is a major step in establishing original material. When in doubt, seek the author if you can, though this is not always possible. It also seems there will always be arguments about what is a real variation and what is not.



Whenever possible, I will always try to purchase the effect, the book, or whatever before publically performing an effect, even if I have figured it out. For example, I read about Bob McAllister's Three Frog Monte and thought of a way to do it, but won't without purchasing the original.



A good point was made about "moves" vs. "routines". Moves are tougher because it is like learning math. Once you know it, you know it and will put it to use.



Doug A.

Even so, he was in some form (stated or not) endorsing it. If he had ethics that said that what he was saying was legally okay was wrong, he wouldn't have published it.



As for the other question, another company couldn't have just come and copied what Ford did. If they wanted to use his motor assemblies and put a different body in it, they'd still have to procure rights from him (it's called a patent :o)



To further explain my example, I'll get as specific as I can without naming names. I had an effect of mine published in SYZYGY and on one of the Best of SYZYGY videos called "Deli Delight". That effect is that a participant freely chooses from a few types of breads, meats, veggies, and cheeses, and a sandwich that's been in a bag I'm holding the entire time turns out to be that exact combination of ingredients. As a kicker, there's a squeeze packet of the chosen condiment in the bag (brilliant touch by Lee Earle, as were a lot of the handling bits).



This other infamous performer (I can't honestly call him a creator, unfortunately) published his "variation" of this effect in his lecture notes. His variation? He used the same exact method to reveal the toppings chosen on a pizza instead of on a sandwich, and he scrapped the structurally important condiment ending (it throws the audience off the path by adding a second method into the mix).



Same method, same basic effect, one minor change in the specific prop used. That's still theft in my book. Not legally, but ethically. I was pissed when I found out, and this other performer couldn't understand why. Then again, this is typical for this performer, so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.



To go back to a non-magic example, something like this isn't fair competition. Say you're an audio company, and another company comes out with a brilliant new feature for their mixer. You want to use that sort of feature in yours. Legally and ethically you have two choices. You can figure out your own way to do it from scratch, or you can contact them and license the technology.



What you can't do is buy their mixer, take it apart, and copy the innards, putting them in a new case. That's intellectual property theft. And that's exactly what this fellow did with my effect. He found out how it worked from when it appeared in SYZYGY and then appropriated the method and effect with an ever so slightly different outer dressing and called it his own. You just can't do that (well, you can, but it's not right).

Somewhat off topic, but this gives me an opportunity to vent. Whenever I show some magicians in my area something new and they like it they feel that I am obligated to show them the workings. They actually get mad if you don't show them. They will often say that "we are all magicians, we should share".



Why can't they understand that I don't want other magicians in my area doing the same stuff that I do.I put a lot of time and effort into finding new material (not to mention the time spent fitting the material to me) and don't want to be giving it all away.



This doesn't mean that I show nothing. I do share many of the effects that I try but will not share the secrets of material I consider to be performance or possible performance material.



My only recourse has been to stop showing certain material to other magicians. My advice to others is that it is OK to ask but take no for an answer and understand the reasons behind this answer

i know what your saying randy.

I`ve been trying to get paul zenon to divulge how he got a tax disk through a car windscreen and he just wont give..

Randy, I hate this too. If there's anyone who should respect your not wanting to show the workings of a trick, it should be a magician. Besides the fact that it's a part of your act, I also like fooling my fellow magicians sometimes and I don't want to ruin it by telling them. I think they're just used to knowing how everything works and when you don't show them it drives them nuts. Oh well, there's got to be some mystery. Tell them they can just live with it. Sheesh!!



Sable

The truth about legalities is very different from what magicians believe and act on.



It seems a shame that so many participants in the world of magic cling to the "Come sue me, it ain't worth your while." attitude.



Certainly there are many different sources of many different misinformations on this subject in magic. When one without an opinion, or unable or unwilling to follow their conscience sees so much confusion they are easily misled to believe they can take the path of most ease to them.



I sat down with a copyright and trademark attorney and pressed the question in it's specifics. The answer was as I always suspected.



A copyrighted book protects the intellectual property within. You are not allowed to present the routines within a magic book verbatim except within the strict accordance of the limiting laws of copyright. If you perform or disperse the routine in a manner that affects the copyright holder's ability to make a living, you are in violation.



To all you wonderful authors who wish to release your rights to any who have bought your book you must specifically state that intent. If you do not, you have failed to accomplish your desires. Say you decide to sell the copyrights to your book and routines to a publisher. You make no special circumstance on the purchase because your (mis)belief and intention are that anyone can perform your routines in any circumstance they wish.



The person who bought your rights now has the right to enforce them even though you chose not to. It is time to stop pleading and propagating ignorance of the law. Copyright is the protection. Nothing more need be written or stated. If you choose not to hold it then state so.



Is the jerk the person who protects the rights granted to him under the law or the person who imitates and takes without regard for the rights of others granted by the law?



_________________

Tom Cutts

Publisher, AM/PM

About Magic...Performing Magic

Tom,

trouble comes when you have to prove that every part of what you published was yours to copyright any way. As most magic is based on past knowledge you might be on sticky ground

phillip

Yep, I guess it is, or at least it can be. Make up your mind, if the law is in your favour you want to follow it and if not, then you scream about magic ethics. This all reminds me of the masked magician debate and indeed life in general. The more we yell about the masked magician, the more he gets airtime. Life in general is much like this: if you spend all your time upset about everything, then the world will treat you a certain way.



I have always found that I got a lot more respect from magicians because of my attitude of sharing what I do, than from slapping everybodies hand for touching my cards. In fact they tend to ask my permission on most things. Attitude is everything in life. I know magic is a cutthroat business of magicians stealing everything they can get their hands on, but I choose not to view it that way. Your way of looking at all this, just ticks everyone off and makes them want to steal your stuff, and if this is what being a full-professional does to you, then I'll think I'll stay as a semi-professional. I expect certain ethics from those that buy my videos, but I refuse to be ridiculous about my expectations.



I will get a lot more in the long run by being a nice about it and being approachable, than getting all upset about everyone that uses my material or tells a friend about some trick he saw on my videos. I’ll be happy if I’m just credited. If I am credited, then hopefully my name will come to mean good magic and they’ll buy my videos. If not, oh well; perhaps they’ll tell someone else about the great trick someone taught them off one of my videos and that person will buy it. Magic is like anything else: you get back what you put in and I intend to put in all I can.



Sable

I find it most peculiar that one should uphold the thought that a person should just sit back and allow his rights to be violated because people are going to do that so just let it go.



I lose no sleep over it, I won't go broke in court over it, but I will let those at fault know they are cheating the originators by ignoring their rights.



One day they will realize just what does go to the grave because people do not respect the art.



Personally, I have no problem deciding what degree of crediting is necessary. I credit out of honor and my audiences are entertained by and respect me for it.

It seems to me that for those of us without big budgets, this is more of an ethical issue than a legal one. The problem is that we don't share the same ethical viewpoint.



In general, most of us will agree that stealing is wrong. The arguments come up around what constitutes stealing. For example, in regard to copying videotapes.



Personally, I think it is as wrong to copy a video as it would be to photocopy a book. And we've all heard the argument, "Well, I wasn't going to buy it anyway, so who am I stealing from?" I go with Tom on this one. I tell people how I feel about it, what my ethical viewpoint is. I don't yell at them, and I don't lose sleep over it, but I think it's important to let people know. You may not convince them immediately, and they may get huffy and defensive, but they may reflect on it later when they're alone.



Bob Taxin

Bob,

Much appreciated viewpoint, but just to put you up to date on this thread, we aren't arguing over copying videos. We're talking about showing other magicians tricks you saw on videos, performing tricks you saw on videos and read in books and how much of a right you have to material you have purchased. Bootlegging has pretty much been down-thumbed by us all. It actually spans a few different threads, but it seems to have culminated here.



Sable

Might be best NOT to post it Phillip lol

Or 50% of themagiccafe may me making up the things they've bought to sell on...

(but hopefully not)

Paul

Presently I own 39 original and 25 copied magical video tapes.



What about this? I'm 21 and I've been studying magic for 12 years. I'm studying law and though my parents are fairly wealthy I don't have the money to purchase every tape I want. Instead I copy them, so I can improve my magic without going bankrupt.



However (!!!!), it is my firm intention not to copy tapes once I'm out of law school. As someone who earns money, I not only have the possibility but also the duty to pay for the things I use. So, as of - let's say - 2004, I'll pay for it.



My idea therefore is: Do you earn money on a regular basis --> then you should really contribute to Daryl's wealth (since he's worked hard to put up his video series). If, for any reason, you don't have enough money, then copy as much tapes as you want.



Yours in better magic,



Christof