Sign up Latest Topics Chat
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 2      Prev   1   2
X

Avatar / Picture

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 257
Reply with quote  #51 
I mean, at the very base of it, you can do what you want "Ethics/Morality is an individual belief, not something you can force and enforce on other people


it was like the conversation that happened when music sharing was popular, what is the difference between letting someone borrow a CD in person, and sharing it over the internet, or  if you bought food at a market and walked out and shared half of it with someone, etc

what is the difference if someone learns a move/routine and shares it with someone else

__________________
Professional: PK-Mentalist/Magician/Geek/Shock Entertainer

Member/Performer: Magic Castle

Creator, Consultant, Lecturer, Imagineer



0
John Cowne

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 419
Reply with quote  #52 
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Cowne
Thanks for this topic, Ray. I find it interesting that how we use the word ‘principle’ has such a wide application in every sphere of life. I have a lawyer-friend - originally came from the States and has now settled in Australia. One of his first orientations to Aussie law was a solid understanding of our Constitution. He was not suprised to find some things are universal. Whenever cases became ambiguous, he could always go back to ‘First Principles’ in law; unpacking the meaning of justice. And I’m old enough to remember what it means when someone says ‘He/she is a man/woman of principle’! I believe in the business world, the (not so) new paradigm shift ( a la Peter Drucker) is from technique/personality driven to principles/character driven. So much angst could be averted - even in magic - by going back to principles.
0
Matt G

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 148
Reply with quote  #53 
Hey Mike, I'm just curious if you have any legal protections or actions you can take against sites like that and others, where people are clearly profiting off of stealing your hard work? Like, we can have all the debates we want about piracy, rights, sharing, and whatever else ... but sites selling your work without your consent is blatantly stealing; nothing more, nothing less, and it upsets me to know that this exists.

I don't have anywhere near enough experience with magic, or the communities associated with it, to say anything meaningful about "what rights we have" as magicians, or what duties we have to protect our craft. All I know is that anytime anyone asks me how I do a trick, I tell them the truth: "Practice."
0
Mike Powers

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,549
Reply with quote  #54 
Hi Matt - Sites that sell copyrighted material are in violation of U.S. and possibly international copyright law. There can be serious monetary consequences and even jail time. But generally there's just a "cease and desist" order. When you make a video or put something into text as a PDF or Word file or physical book, it automatically has some degree of copyright protection i.e. people are not allowed to give it away to others or sell it. Greater legal protection comes by registering the item with the copyright folks and paying a small fee. 

There's no stopping the pirates in other countries or even the ones in the U.S. Bob Farmer is a lawyer and has made some efforts in this regard but I suspect that his labor won't change things much. The pirates aren't afraid and nothing seems to happen to them.

BTW you can't copyright and idea, only your expression of the idea. So if someone reads a trick and writes up the exact handling in their own words, they can legally sell it and/or give it away with impunity from a legal standpoint. In music, there are other considerations. You may be aware of Led Zeppelin's problems with Spirit regarding Stairway to Heaven. There's a lot of money at stake. But in magic, all we have is an unwritten rule that it's not cool to rewrite a trick and publish it without permission. People who do that get called out. There is a large "can of worms" about what constitutes a legitimate variation. Then there's a "handling" which is the weakest form of variation as in "I use a Jordan Count instead of an Elmsley Count." Or, "I control the selections in a different way but everything else is the same." These "handlings" would be considered bad form and generally people who make slight changes to routines and publish them as "variations" get called out. But often the situations are not black and white.

Some consider moves to be in a different class than effects. Some feel that moves are there to be used and re-described as needed. Of course a download or move marketed as a manuscript would not come under this "rule." Of course the inventor of the move should be credited under all circumstances.

Routines like "Reset" have become IMO almost public domain. They are so well known that talking about problems you're having learning Reset seems like fair game to me. Paul Harris isn't going to call you out for that. Marketed single items are different. Methods for those shouldn't be talked about openly. 

There's more to talk about and, as always, these notions are just my opinions. 

Mike
0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 365
Reply with quote  #55 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Powers

Then there's a "handling" which is the weakest form of variation as in "I use a Jordan Count instead of an Elmsley Count." Or, "I control the selections in a different way but everything else is the same." These "handlings" would be considered bad form




Mike, when someone says they have a "handling" of something, is your description above generally how that phrase is taken ?

I use the term "handling", in fact I used it a couple of days ago in the thread about the things we perform other than cards. When I use the term, what you describe isn't what I mean at all, and I'm now wondering if perhaps my post could have been taken the wrong way.
When I say I have a handling of something, I mean a heck of a lot more than simply replacing a sleight with some other sleight.

Perhaps there is a better word ?




Jim



0
RayJ

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 4,006
Reply with quote  #56 
Quote:
Originally Posted by X
I mean, at the very base of it, you can do what you want "Ethics/Morality is an individual belief, not something you can force and enforce on other people


it was like the conversation that happened when music sharing was popular, what is the difference between letting someone borrow a CD in person, and sharing it over the internet, or  if you bought food at a market and walked out and shared half of it with someone, etc

what is the difference if someone learns a move/routine and shares it with someone else


You shouldn't have to force anyone nor pass a law. They should follow good principles out of ...principle.

Regarding sharing a CD and allowing someone to copy it, that is technically theft and obviously wrong. That's what some kids do, each one buys one song then they share it with 20 friends, who in turn share one with you. The artist sells one song, you get 21. Great deal for the kid. The artist, not so much. Happens in magic too.
0
Mike Powers

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,549
Reply with quote  #57 
I may be wrong but I interpret the term "handling" to be weaker than "variation." I have thought of a "handling" as more of a personalize version of a trick. And a "variation" as an improved version or at least a significant change from the original.

Mike
0
RayJ

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 4,006
Reply with quote  #58 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Powers
I may be wrong but I interpret the term "handling" to be weaker than "variation." I have thought of a "handling" as more of a personalize version of a trick. And a "variation" as an improved version or at least a significant change from the original.

Mike


Mike, I think you have it about right. I think there's probably room for semantics in the definition, but I've always taken handling to mean when the effect remains the same, perhaps even identical, yet the mechanics are different. To me, it rises to a variation when something significant changes and alters the effect in a substantive manner.

Substituting a Zarrow Shuffle for Vernon's Triumph Shuffle while maintaining everything else the same to me is a handling.

Having the deck end up in new deck order is a variation.
0
Mike Powers

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,549
Reply with quote  #59 
Exactly RayJ. That's it.

M
0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 365
Reply with quote  #60 
Thank you, Mike and Ray.

When I use the term "handling" I usually mean a bit more than just substituting a sleight.

As an example from my post in the other thread, the first piece I mentioned I have a handling of was Presto Changeo. I'm sure you are familiar with this classic piece.

In my handling of this piece, two coins are introduced, a copper and a silver, which can be examined (as per usual). One is held in each hand, at fingertips, displaying the coins full face to the spectators (the hands appear to be otherwise empty). They are held, one in each fist for a moment, and both coins change to silver. They are held in the fists once more, and both now change to copper. The coins are then changed one at a time, to silver. Both silvers are then shaken (slightly) in the same fist (this is the only time during the routine, that both coins are in the same hand), and return back to their original state, one copper and one silver. The coins are handed to the spectator, and the hands are otherwise completely empty.

By having a coin in each hand, and taking the piece to chest level, it can be seen by more people (all displays throughout the routine are done with the coins full face to the audience).
The changes of the copper coins to silver, one at a time, I feel, adds to and enhances the piece, and is in keeping with the basic plot.
There is a one handed switch used, which I believe is original and unpublished.
There are a few little touches throughout the routine, which add to the deceptiveness.

At it's core it's still Presto Changeo, and the basic magical effect remains the same, but the changes (and thinking) are more than just replacing a move. This is what I mean when I say handling.



Jim


0
Jack Deschain

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 66
Reply with quote  #61 

I hope I don't butcher this formatting




Quote:
Originally Posted by RayJ

Others will say so long as care is taken to prevent undesirable exposure to the general public, then it is OK. So the "private areas" of forums that people cannot access on demand would be suitable. Or the TMF Saturday Sessions where all who attend are magicians, or should be.


I've been toying with the idea of buy a camera JUST to get some feedback from you guys. I live in the middle of nowhere in the Catkills. One stoplight town and I live five miles out of that. Legit NO cell phone service when I'm currently sitting. I have 100 meg fiber internet but no cell service. How is that possible? I legit don't own a cell phone because it's just not worth it.  I've been wanting to buy a good webcam but have you seen the maket on those haha? That's why I asked about cameras a month or two ago.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RayJ

Some will participate in the behavior you describe, but not in a public setting. They are up for one-on-one or small group sessions, but in person only.


See that bit above about living in the middle of nowhere haha

Quote:
Originally Posted by RayJ

Varying existing routines is done routinely. And those variations are often subsequently published. I think so long as credits for inspiration are given, it is probably OK. Now if a specific sleight in the routine is required, and the author doesn't secure permission to teach it, they can describe the intent of the move and direct the reader where to go and learn it. I've seen this done.


I get what you are getting at. I remember seeing the Buck Twins do a routine and then NOT teach the Clipshift. The routine was good but the clipshift was what made a lot of people take notice. They published it later, and I bought it, but thats another story.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RayJ
So your good question has many potential answers. Even more than I listed.

The bottom line might simply be if it "feels wrong" to you to do something, then maybe you shouldn't.


I appreciate the honesty. I really do! I can't say it "feels wrong" I just don't want to step on toes. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Powers
 Routines like "Reset" have become IMO almost public domain. They are so well known that talking about problems you're having learning Reset seems like fair game to me. Paul Harris isn't going to call you out for that. Marketed single items are different. Methods for those shouldn't be talked about openly. Mike


I agree to some extent. Is Reset almost public domain? It should be but im 99% sure there are markerted one offs that have the bones of the origonal
reset.  Granted, they have PH's blessing. I think the version from True Astonishments DVDs cans be bought as a single anyway.  So, is it really public? Once again, I don't want to step on toes.

I promise I'm not trying to be confrontational about anything here. I'm sorry if it ever reads that way. I know how posts can be. I just value your guys input but I'm still going to ask questions and play devils advocate.

For what it's worth, WHEN I perform Reset I do it straight out of the book and it flies, ugly wrist turn and all. So what do I know? haha

0
RayJ

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 4,006
Reply with quote  #62 
Jack, I think an easy way to begin with a camera is to just by getting a reasonably priced webcam.  Technology is so good these days that I'll bet you can get one delivered for around $30 bucks that is more than acceptable to participate in the Zoom meetings.  I just jumped on Amazon and saw numerous 1080p webcams with microphone for $25.00 and up.  Dip your toe in the water before buying an expensive camera.

By not wanting to step on toes, you are basically saying it "feels wrong", which is my point.  

The Buck Twins did the right thing in not explaining a move that wasn't theirs to explain.  I'm not sure if they contacted Chad Nelson to ask, or if they just assumed he wouldn't be happy if they did.  Regardless, it was the right move.  Anyone that wants to learn it should buy Chad's work on it.  

Someone posted an exposure video of it and called it "Clickshift".  Maybe changing the name makes it OK to reveal?  Like using Kings for the Asher Twist changed the entire effect?  I'll stop now or I'll get myself worked up.  
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.