|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9 | ||||||||||
Anders Moden Regular user 163 Posts 
|
Quote:
On 2008-04-06 18:01, meilechl wrote: Steve Fearson got his manuscript from Stephen Pellegrino, who wrote it down and sold it on eBay the day after Healed and Sealed was aired on the David Blaine Vertigo show. This script didn't contain the crushing/uncrushing part, just the can open/closed. It's a story in itself and Tim Ellis has written about it here: http://www.magicunlimited.com/Pubrepop_ripoff.htm The Crushed and Cured DVD came out a while after I published the printed manuscript. I wrote a bit about it yesterday here (8th post down): http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......&forum=5 To my knowledge, there's no connection between "Re-pop" and "Crushed and Cured". |
|||||||||
meilechl Special user 657 Posts
|
Thanks.
|
|||||||||
|
daffydoug Eternal Order Look mom! I've got 14077 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-04-08 08:30, Anders Moden wrote: Therefore, no legal action shall be forthcoming, correct?
The difficult must become easy, the easy beautiful and the beautiful magical.
|
|||||||||
Dan Bernier Inner circle Canada 2298 Posts
|
I really enjoyed reading this post and found it to be very interresting.
inidyls said in an ealier post, "Take for instance the Enchanted Cube, Daryl owns the rights to the effect. But now every Tom Dick and Harry are selling it." I wonder though, does Daryl own the rights to the Rubiks Cube? Did he get permission from the makers of Rubiks Cube? I don't know the answers myself, but I have seen many magic tricks and accesories that use material or objects that were patented by someone else or a company. Take the "Elavator Levitation" the gimmick is a patented product by another company. What about most pulls out there? They are patented by other people. Magic creator's use these other patented products and objects to create a magical device or trick with them. How many of them get permission to resell their product(which is legal to do, but in the same sense as what I've been reading here, unethical) I agree that we all should stay away from cheap knock offs. I try to all the time. However, where do we draw the line? Posted: May 6, 2008 1:51pm Just to add. God forbid the day when the law allows people to copyright idea's, and thoughts. Posted: May 6, 2008 1:53pm Sorry about that! In my first post it should of said "reels", not pulls.
"If you're going to walk in the rain, don't complain about getting wet!"
|
|||||||||
|
stoneunhinged Inner circle 3067 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-05-06 13:51, Gospel Dan wrote: Uh...but what else is "intellectual property" if not copyrighted (or otherwise legally protected) ideas and thoughts? |
|||||||||
|
Dan Bernier Inner circle Canada 2298 Posts
|
Sorry about that. My last post was meant with sarcasm, which I'm obviously terrible at.(lol)
"If you're going to walk in the rain, don't complain about getting wet!"
|
|||||||||
|
clarissa35f Veteran user 363 Posts
|
I'm new to magic, But I believe we should not reward unethical behavior. On the other hand I have no idea what MM has done that is unethical, this may be old hat to everyone here. I would like to NOT buy from MM, or support any magician that associates with them, But I would Like first to educate myself as to what these unethical business practices are.
I do nopt want it all rehashed but maybe a Link to a page that explains? Thanking in advance, Clarissa
“Amateurs practice until they get it right.
Professionals practice until they can’t get it wrong.” <Anonymous> "There is no such thing as magic, there is no other way that could have been done" <Whit Haydn> |
|||||||||
MickeyPainless Inner circle California 6065 Posts
|
Clarissa,
Simply do a search of MM here on the Café and be prepared for a longgggggggg read! |
|||||||||
|
mmreed Inner circle Harrisburg, PA 1432 Posts
|
The prob is - its not JUST MagicMakers.
For example, Fun Inc sells knock offs. Mak Magic Sells knock offs. Magicity sells knock offs. even the lustrious Murphys sells knock offs. So when people talk about not supporting anyone that sells knock offs, that means you cannot buy from ANYONE except the original inventor - often of which is forced to market the item via one of these suppliers. Point I am making is - Magic Makers does have some original items, as does Mak, Fun, Murphys, etc... you cannot say you wont buy from someone because they sell knock offs - you would never be able to buy from ANYONE then... but what you CAN do is simply do the research and choose to not buy the ITEMS that are knocks offs. These suppliers are just like any other business - they will sell what the demographics buy. Sorry for the ranting - I just get tired of everyone focusing on MagicMakers when all the suppliers and manufacturers do it. Moral of the story - educate yourself on the effect before buying and CHOOSE which effect to buy - contact the store and ask questions..etc.. Its just a hardware store - you have cheap screw drivers and you have high end Craftsman ones. You get to pick.
Mark Reed
Wedding and Event Entertainment |
|||||||||
|
spencerpeterson Regular user New York City 186 Posts
|
The only thing I LOVED by Magic Makers was Cutting Edge Cards and Coins by John Born and Jason Dean.
|
|||||||||
George Ledo Magic Café Columnist SF Bay Area 3042 Posts
|
Okay, someone help me out here. I'm not being sarcastic at all, just really really curious.
Traditionally, people who have patented inventions have done so in the hopes of protecting an item that can potentially make money for them. The key, from a selling standpoint, would be that there are a lot of potential customers... as in a LOT of customers. So far it makes sense. But now we come to the magic stuff that's getting patented nowadays, where the potential customer base is probably in the low thousands if that much. By the time you get done with the patent application fees, the drawings, the lawyer, and so forth, you've spent a few thousand bucks. Now you take your own net profit from these sales (which gets diluted by about half if you re-sell through dealers), and your total take could very well end up being less than what you spent to patent the thing in the first place. Okay, so large illusions may be worth patenting, but I really have to wonder about the smaller stuff. Are people patenting this stuff to protect an investment and a real potential income, or just to frame the patent itself and hang it on their wall? Again, I'm not being sarcastic here. I'm just really curious.
That's our departed buddy Burt, aka The Great Burtini, doing his famous Cups and Mice routine
www.georgefledo.net Latest column: "Sorry about the photos in my posts here" |
|||||||||
daver Elite user Jupiter, FL 436 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-05-06 13:49, Gospel Dan wrote (Re: Enchanted Cube): Would this then imply that every effect sold where a performer has to modify some element of say, clothing, like shoes, pants or a suit/sport coat need get permission from Nike, Reebok, Asics, Adidas, Levi Strauss, Armani, Versace and so on before they can market their effect? I submit that in an effect that says "go buy a xyz, and do this to it, and then you can perform this effect like this..." one does not have to get permission. (In general - some products have disclaimers that prevent purchasers from altering them, but like clothes, or a Rubik's Cube I think are not in that arena) and in fact, some of these effects that get you to buy something like a Rubik's Cube would be welcomed by the makers, because it not only sells more to performers, but I'd bet spectators will buy more too! But I digress... ;-)
Dave
What's the difference between a magician and a deck of cards? A deck of cards has FOUR suits... |
|||||||||
|
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-01-13 22:47, jonnyboy wrote: Great post; I'm glad the thread has been kicked up. With respect to availing oneself of IP Law protection, it should be noted that while, as in the example, patents have to be "obtained" by use of the law, trademark rights accrue WITHOUT any direct recourse to the legal system, simply by using a recognizable name/design/etc. in commerce attached to a product or product line. Even particular colors and restaurant layouts have been held to be trademarks. It's a common misconception that a trademark must be registered to be valid. Registration offers some default protections, and if someone infringes on your trademark and THAT PERSON registers it, you can have some problems, because the registration entitles one to some default assumptions. Additionally, you need to (of course) go through the legal system to ENFORCE your trademark, but you DO NOT need to do anything other than use whatever it is in commerce to acquire legally valid, protectable, trademark rights. E.G., if I name my new magic product the AMSAFDAEXZ, and do nothing other than make it and sell it in magic shops, then someone else comes along and uses the same name, I can take action based on trademark infringement even though I've never bothered to register it as a trademark.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
|
jonnyboy Inner circle San Diego 1021 Posts
|
Nice analysis, although the problem with relying on TM protection is that in the case of a magic effect, it would only protect the name of the effect, and not the effect itself. If someone copied the effect and simply re-named it, there would be little recourse by the originator of the effect. We've seen innumerable instances of this in the magic industry.
John |
|||||||||
|
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts
|
Yes, it's pretty weak protection, though conceivably more than the name could be found to be a trademark; I think such things as, for instance, the distinctive decor of a restaurant chain was held to be an enforceable trademark, so there'd be a shot for infringement of a trick's appearance.
I think the point would be most useful if someone DID rip off the name, and the originator didn't think he had any rights because he didn't "get" (register) the trademark; if you're using it in commerce, you've probably got a trademark -- registration is a separate issue; that's all I wanted to point out.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
|
daver Elite user Jupiter, FL 436 Posts
|
I recall a story told to me where Xerox lost a court case a number of years ago to protect the name "Xerox" because they delayed in trying to protect it. For years, people would go to the copy room to "Xerox" something rather than "photocopy" it, and Xerox did not either soon enough, or actively enough work to protect the name, and a court found that Xerox had lost any protection for the name Xerox as a result.
Anyone else recall this? How does this map to the if you use it, you have a trademark discussion?
Dave
What's the difference between a magician and a deck of cards? A deck of cards has FOUR suits... |
|||||||||
|
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts
|
Trademark protection can be lost if it "goes generic." There's a general principle that if you "sleep on your rights," you lose them; that's why, for instance, there are statutes of limitation, i.e. time limits to file lawsuits. So if you know (or reasonably should have known) that your trademarked name (or whatever else we're talking about) is being used as a generic term and you take no steps, then you can lose your rights.
That's why, for instance, bottles are clearly labeled "Tobasco brand pepper sauce." They're making sure that even though everyone I know calls it "Tobasco sauce," everyone knows it's the name of a brand, not a general type of product. That's also why if you start a very small company that infringes on a trademarked name, even if your sales are negligible, you'll get a cease & desist letter from the big company's attorneys, or an offer to license the name, or something of that nature; if they ignore it, they could lose it, whether it's to another specific company, or common use. Companies frequently will remind you via on-air commercials or printed packaging materials that they have a trademark.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
jstone Inner circle Someday I'll have 1473 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-01-06 22:10, Dj_Qbert wrote: Qbert, If you ever decide to write a book or publish a DVD, let me know. I will buy a copy and then retype the book and reshoot the DVD and sell it for half price on my website. I'm assuming that you would have a problem with this if it impacted you. Also, I feel it's a bit childish to call someone childish because s/he decides to shop at a certain store over another. Boycotting isn't always about "helping the magic community." I don't smoke, and I don't buy cigarettes, and I try to avoid places where there is a lot of cigarette smoke in the atmosphere. My "boycotting" of cigarettes is not meant to "help the community." It's simply meant to keep something that I feel it toxic out of my body. That's not childish... By the way, this was by no means an attack on smokers, but rather just a simple analogy to demonstrate a point. If everything was meant to "benefit the magic community" then you your post is in violation. Your post does not "help the magic community." |
|||||||||
Tim Ellis V.I.P. Melbourne, Australia 1234 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2008-06-11 10:42, mmreed wrote: Yes! And to heklp you do your research before you buy.... http://www.magicfakers.blogspot.com/
www.MagicUnlimited.com
www.timellismagic.com Visit our online shop for instant downloads and ebooks https://shop.timellismagic.com/ Blog - www.magicunlimited.typepad.com |
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24314 Posts
|
A lot of energy has been completely wasted on this thread. This thread basically duplicates other threads that have been around since the very early days of the Magic Café. It's a waste of time to take out petitions against Magic Makers, China Magic or any other group of people who produce knockoffs, because most magic inventors are too lazy to even bother with the simplest forms of protection of their inventions, other than copyright.
Many of the things that Magic Makers has allegedly stolen are items that are in the public domain, but were manufactured in a high quality version by someone who paid for the "rights" to these items, when there was basically nothing to purchase. Public domain is a legal term that applies to things that are not patented or protected by any kind of legal coverage. Copyright does not cover the apparatus used for magic tricks. It can cover the designs on the apparatus and it can cover the text and illustrations in the instructions, but as far as copyrighting a trick -- it's a waste of time. Burling Hull was one of the first to learn about this when he attempted to protect his Improved "Cards Mysterious" by copyrighting them (1909). Almost immediately, other dealers started producing the cards, knowing that Hull could not protect this trick by copyright. It required a patent. By the way, you probably have a pack of these in your kit somewhere. They are better known as "Svengali Decks." Copying a book, a DVD, a CD or a set of instructions is a violation of copyright. But copyright doesn't extend to the physical doodads that we use. You need a patent for that. Patents have a limited lifespan. It used to be 17 years. Now that has been extended, but not by much. Copyrights are cheap. Patents are relatively expensive. Once you sell one of your pet tricks on the open market, if you haven't applied for a patent, it's up for grabs. If you apply for a patent, and put that you have done so on the product, its case, its package or something else that will serve as a warning, then you may be covered. It's very complex. But if you haven't done it, then all you have to fall back on is the ethics of the magical community. And those won't hold up in court. Magic Makers doesn't care. So don't waste your time. BTW, George Robinson of Viking Magic and I were having a similar discussion about the same people in his shop in 2003. John Cornelius and I had a similar discussion about this same thing in June of 2001. Petitions won't help. The only way it will stop is if you put an end to it at your own personal level. Until then, it's going to continue.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Magic Makers (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9 | ||||||||||
Posted: Apr 8, 2008 12:30 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.1 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 < 
|