The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Sharpie Through Bill by Alan Rorrison & SansMinds -VS- Timothy Wenk's MISLED (16 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9 [Next]
BobSled
View Profile
New user
28 Posts

Profile of BobSled
I'll send you full info for how to make it for your advanced review, that OK? The shopping list of parts is surprisingly small and easy to assemble.
Richard Kaufman
View Profile
Inner circle
2391 Posts

Profile of Richard Kaufman
This is really a whole lot of smoke and NO fire.
tophatter
View Profile
Inner circle
connecticut
2571 Posts

Profile of tophatter
Years ago many years ago I created the Melting Fork & the Chapstick trick both Great effects . Then all the crap started I copied Guy bavli on his side bend spoon effect . I copied Mark Jenest on his Chapstick effect . First off the effects I created are made better & and are completely different effects but I got BLASTED on the Café just like Alan is right now ! I have 2 new effects I just performed them tonight at a gig I made them just for myself mindblowing & I will never share it here or sell them to distributors at the moment . WHY ? cause it's not worth it others magicians just like members here on the Café stir up an argument ... I really wonder if these Clowns are really out there performing No cause there to busy on this forum trying to figure out who created what trick ! The bottom line is you can penetrate a sharpie through a bill instead of a pencil so get over it !!! if You have a problem with Alan's effect then don't buy it move on & leave it to the real performers that make a living performing ! Nuff said here .....
TStone
View Profile
V.I.P.
Stockholm, Sweden
732 Posts

Profile of TStone
Quote:
On Dec 19, 2016, tophatter wrote:
Years ago many years ago I created the Melting Fork & the Chapstick trick both Great effects . Then all the crap started I copied Guy bavli on his side bend spoon effect . I copied Mark Jenest on his Chapstick effect . First off the effects I created are made better & and are completely different effects but I got BLASTED on the Café just like Alan is right now !

A fork is indeed very different from a spoon, as anyone eating soup would attest.
http://www.mystiquemagiccompany.com/products
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3818 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
I still have my side bend. That is one of the best spoon bends to have ever been released. *** I love that thing.

As for the Misled manuscript having explained the slit, I guess I didn't read the whole manuscript carefully because I don't remember it being mentioned.

My question for Alan is if the effect can be performed as per the video representation, where the front and back of the marker sitting in the bill. I remember the Misled to be super dirty from the back due to the way the thing worked.
Kaliix
View Profile
Inner circle
Connecticut
1406 Posts

Profile of Kaliix
Tom, you are just incorrect. The invention that we call Misled is an actual device. It passes the five tests for patent eligibility which are, "... the subject matter of the invention must be patent eligible, the invention must be useful, it must be new, it cannot be obvious and it must be described with the particularity required so that people of skill in the relevant field can understand what the invention is, make it and use it without engaging in undue experimentation."

Misled is patent eligible because it is an invention. Real tangible things are patent eligible, not copyright eligible. Anyone can create a method for penetrating a bill sideways like is done in Misled. The front and back illusion is the concept that Mr. Wenk exploited when he invented Misled. The Misled gimmick itself is patentable but is not copyrightable.

Quote:
On Dec 19, 2016, TStone wrote:
Quote:
On Dec 18, 2016, Kaliix wrote:
The Berne treaty covers copyright. The method for doing something is patentable, which is totally different than copyright, but as stated earlier, the patent is now expired.

You lack understanding of both patents and copyright.
If this had been an *actual* method for transfering objects through paper without breakage, something useable an factory, it would be eligeble for a patent.
That isn't what Misled is. Rather, it is a fictional rendition of what it might look like. The pen doesn't actually penetrate anything. It is fiction. Drama. Art. And as all other dramatic works, it is covered by the Berne treaty.
The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge.
~Daniel J. Boorstin
Yuan Moons
View Profile
Veteran user
348 Posts

Profile of Yuan Moons
Quote:
On Dec 19, 2016, kissdadookie wrote:


My question for Alan is if the effect can be performed as per the video representation, where the front and back of the marker sitting in the bill. I remember the Misled to be super dirty from the back due to the way the thing worked.


No, that's just the usual Sans Minds trailer stuff. From behind you'd be busted as with Mislead or Just Passing' Thru.
TStone
View Profile
V.I.P.
Stockholm, Sweden
732 Posts

Profile of TStone
Quote:
On Dec 19, 2016, Kaliix wrote:
Tom, you are just incorrect. The invention that we call Misled is an actual device.

You really believe a proper performance of the illusion is to merely display the gimmick and do nothing else? The arguments of you ripoff apologists are, quite frankly, insane.
emyers99
View Profile
Inner circle
Columbus, Ohio
3590 Posts

Profile of emyers99
Name calling- the last signs of a failing argument. Way to go Tom. As an actual lawyer, I can tell you that Kaliix is correct on this one. You keep focussing on the visual effect. If your logic were correct, every version of rising card, sawing in half, etc would be a ripoff. Give it up Tom.
TStone
View Profile
V.I.P.
Stockholm, Sweden
732 Posts

Profile of TStone
Quote:
On Dec 20, 2016, emyers99 wrote:
Name calling- the last signs of a failing argument. Way to go Tom. As an actual lawyer, I can tell you that Kaliix is correct on this one. You keep focussing on the visual effect. If your logic were correct, every version of rising card, sawing in half, etc would be a ripoff. Give it up Tom.

No, I am focusing on the work as a whole. If you had been a magician and not a lawyer, you would also be able to properly evaluate the work in question.
If Kaliix had been correct, using the exact same handling with a black round pencil instead of a yellow hexagonal pencil would constitute a whole new work - which obviously is the wrong conclusion.
Also, if he had been correct, the 5-6 other tricks you can do with Wenk's gaff - those tricks that are not Wenk's and not Misled - would be considered infringements. And that is also an insane claim.
If you think that patent law is what best cover artistic work, I very much doubt that you are an I.P lawyer.
I've done Misled with a wide range of objects, mostly swizzle sticks that have been permanently gaffed in the same fashion as the first Misled prototype that Wenk mentions in his manuscript. Changing the object to a similar object is a trivial change on the level "but I do it with a Blue backed deck." It is still Misled.
And yes, a Devano deck with a tarot deck is still a Devano deck - you might claim otherwise, but you'd be wrong.
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3818 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
Should I point out that I don't recall Wenk having applied and gotten a patent on Misled? So this is entirely an ethical matter rather than anything which would stand in a court of law. Should I also point out that the cost of litigation would be ridiculous and end up being a loss loss situation since whatever awards are rewarded in the court, it's surely not going to cover the expenses of the trial.
Steven Conner
View Profile
Inner circle
2348 Posts

Profile of Steven Conner
Hey fellows, I think it is time to give it up. If Tim has a problem with Alan, it is up to them to resolve not the community. There are literally thousands of tricks or effects that have been copied, altered, improved, messed up, etc. I personally know at least two impromptu versions of this effect that look pretty doggone good. I combine one of these with another effect and it smokes Misled. As magicians, why not spend all this energy on more productive ideas. I too have been ripped off but its just not worth a futile fight. I go back to the argument about golf equipment that is copied everyday and the big boys can't stop that either. And if you do play golf, how many of you bought copies because you didn't want to spend the money for an original or just didn't have the money. Let's move on to making our magic better.

Best

Steve
"The New York Papers," Mark Twain once said,"have long known that no large question is ever really settled until I have been consulted; it is the way they feel about it, and they show it by always sending to me when they get uneasy. "
TStone
View Profile
V.I.P.
Stockholm, Sweden
732 Posts

Profile of TStone
Quote:
On Dec 20, 2016, kissdadookie wrote:
Should I point out that I don't recall Wenk having applied and gotten a patent on Misled?

Dramatic work is covered by copyright, not patent law.
Yuan Moons
View Profile
Veteran user
348 Posts

Profile of Yuan Moons
What does the law matter? In the magic community we police ourselves with reputation being the stake.
TStone
View Profile
V.I.P.
Stockholm, Sweden
732 Posts

Profile of TStone
Eric Mead just wrote on Facebook:
Quote:
I "invented" or "discovered" exactly this idea of modifying a sharpie cap to do Misled about 15 or so years ago. (It can also be done with other pen caps.) I showed it around to a few magician friends back then, but we all agreed that, while it had certain advantages and appeal, it was a minor change and the disadvantage of tight viewing angles with a thick sharpie outweighed whatever was gained. I showed it to Michael Weber among others who commented, "Lecture Note Item."
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3818 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
Quote:
On Dec 20, 2016, TStone wrote:
Quote:
On Dec 20, 2016, kissdadookie wrote:
Should I point out that I don't recall Wenk having applied and gotten a patent on Misled?

Dramatic work is covered by copyright, not patent law.


This wouldn't be dramatic work though. We are talking about the mechanical workings of an effect, not the scripting and presentation of said effect.

You also can't claim the idea/concept of physical objects phasing through each other without causing physical damage because there's a ridiculous amount of literary works spanning goodness knows how long of a period to present day that illustrates that idea/concept prior.
TStone
View Profile
V.I.P.
Stockholm, Sweden
732 Posts

Profile of TStone
Quote:
On Dec 20, 2016, kissdadookie wrote:
This wouldn't be dramatic work though. We are talking about the mechanical workings of an effect, not the scripting and presentation of said effect.

Are you completely insane? Magic is not real. It is a theatrical art. Drama. Fiction. Not reality. We use our craft to present illusions. There are no mechanical workings of an effect. Remove everything that is our craft from Misled, and you will have nothing left of the work - nothing mechanical, nothing dramatic, no illusion; nothing. Misled is 100% dramatic work.
bunkyhenry
View Profile
Special user
NYC Metro
823 Posts

Profile of bunkyhenry
Quote:
On Dec 19, 2016, Alan Rorrison wrote:
Bunky.. if you want I can find some time to have a chat with you and we can see if we cant make it more workable for you


Can you PM me and tell me how to perform this surrounded? It should not take long!!
kissdadookie
View Profile
Inner circle
3818 Posts

Profile of kissdadookie
Quote:
On Dec 20, 2016, TStone wrote:
Quote:
On Dec 20, 2016, kissdadookie wrote:
This wouldn't be dramatic work though. We are talking about the mechanical workings of an effect, not the scripting and presentation of said effect.

Are you completely insane? Magic is not real. It is a theatrical art. Drama. Fiction. Not reality. We use our craft to present illusions. There are no mechanical workings of an effect. Remove everything that is our craft from Misled, and you will have nothing left of the work - nothing mechanical, nothing dramatic, no illusion; nothing. Misled is 100% dramatic work.


The METHOD is the mechanical portion and what is being sold and what is being contested here. It is also the only thing that is up for IP protection in this instance. Alan didn't steal Tim's scripting and presentation so your copyright argument does not hold water here. The concept is also not new or unique due to previous art.

Previous art dictates that a pencil passing through a bill is not a new and unique idea warranting copyright protection, due to previous art (solid objects passing through/phasing through other solid objects have been written about and presented in various media for so long that one really would be hard pressed to find when it was first mentioned).

What is being sold is not the concept or idea for the premise of the effect. What is being sold is a mechanical method to achieve the illusion.

You obviously are defending things and speaking on legal grounds without any knowledge on actual IP laws. This also applies to U.K. laws. I work in the industry and we deal with international IP regularly. You clearly don't and you clearly have not a clue as to what constitutes IP protection and what doesn't.

So the real question is if you are insane, trying to argue on a topic you clearly do not have even the remotest grasp of.

As a side note, what is the deal with you Swedes. Your the second one I've encountered on a message board that thinks their understanding (or in this case, clear lack of) is the end all be all on the subject of discussion? Had almost the same issue with one on a fitness board that somehow got it in his mind that bulk supplements sales are international rather than US domestic even after I spent a ridiculous amount of time trying to explain it all in layman terms. LOL. Very reminiscent of you here Tom. Not meant as an insult, just found it amusing.
TStone
View Profile
V.I.P.
Stockholm, Sweden
732 Posts

Profile of TStone
Quote:
On Dec 20, 2016, kissdadookie wrote:
What is being sold is a mechanical method to achieve the illusion.

Mindboggling! You seem to lack understanding of what our art and craft consist of.
There is no "mechanical method". There is only the work itself. The object does nothing on its own. Without the Misled handling, Eric Mead's Sharpie solution is just a broken pen.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Sharpie Through Bill by Alan Rorrison & SansMinds -VS- Timothy Wenk's MISLED (16 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2019 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.21 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL