Could ya’ll tell me who owns the rights to Harbin’s Zig Zag illusion. I bought a set of plans from Paul Osbourne and would like to know if I have the right to build and perform this one.

Thanks, Owln

My understanding is that the illusion was detailed in The Magic of Robert Harbin (issued in a limited edition of 500). The rights to have the illusion manufactured for you, and to perform it (along with the other effects featured) were included with the purchase of the book. The owner of each copy of the book was recorded, along with the issue number they have been given.

As such, there should only be 500 performers worldwide.

I believe the rights to the book are owned by an origami society with which Harbin was associated, but I *could* be very wide of the mark there. They would technically be the ones to enforce any such licensing.

Someone back me up here. Does that sound about right?

Harbin originally owned the rights to it. largely, due to a lot of knock offs it is now in the public domain, build away and use.

The legendary Robert Harbin invented many original effects and one of them was the Zig Zag which as Matthew rightly states was published in a limited run of The Magic Of Robert Harbin book. The rights to use this effect was and still does remain with the owners of the book and officially no-one else!.

Just because he has sadly passed away does not give anyone the right to simply copy and use an effect that he had the rights to. It is sad that there are some individuals who decide to go against ethics and morals and produce knock offs of illusions and smaller effects and perform them , often badly. The zig zag illusion ( the best example of this type of rip-off ) is most definitely not and never was intended to be in the public domain . unfortunately Robert Harbin and many other inventors were not aware that lurking in the future was the internet and worse still, you tube.

The rights were in fact held with the origami society but after intervention from The Magic Circle in London I believe that they were able to obtain the copyrights to Robert Harbin's magic effects.

You should never support dealers and magicians who feel that they have a legitimate right to be able to copy other peoples property without permission. Tricks or routines, including music.

I myself unfortunately have fallen foul to a certain magician who decided to use his camera phone to take pictures of certain aspects of my own act once it had been set up for a major competition back stage . So just because others think it is fair game it isn't!

Please don't take the attitude of "Build away and use".

Stuart Brown
British Magical Champion
Of Stage Manipulation 2007

I posted this elsewhere, but since the matter has come up again, it merits reposting...

Interesting to see that we are discussing the Zig Zag in regards to performance rights, building rights and the issue of what is or isn't public domain.

I've recently had several different conversations with various magicians and organizations concerning this very thing, with this very illusion.

A fellow magician first sparked my curiosity when I read the following comment from him.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


...I'll remind all who read this that the only people that have the rights to build and perform are the original purchasers of the Robert Harbin Book of Magic. Harbin worked very hard to protect his illusions and all of us who bought the book had to sign an agreement to that effect. Many feel that it is now in the public domain today. I don't and feel that it's a matter of ethics. Harbin created much powerful magic and tried hard to establish his proprietary rights.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I contacted this particular magician and at that time, he thought that the rights might have been non-transferable with only the initial purchasers being granted rights to build and perform the contained illusions in, The Magic or Robert Harbin .

With this in mind, I contacted the Magic Circle in England which now exclusively owns the copyright to, The Magic or Robert Harbin to ask them where things stood on the matter of rights and what the ethical approach would be.

The President of the Magic Circle, Mr. Alan Shaxon sent me the following reply:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dear Kyle

When you purchase an original numbered copy of `Magic of Robert Harbin you will find therein on page 192,
an Agreement which states in clause (d) That the purchaser will not manufacture or make up any of the items published in the book except for his own personal and exclusive use.

I think this answers your question in that once you own the book you can make up any of it, but not to manufacture it for sale to others. The original purchaser was bound not to divulge the contents or offer it for sale within a period of 2 years, but that was in 1970, so obviously it is legitimate to buy one second-hand now.

You are correct in stating that The Magic Circle now owns the copyright to the book, only 500 of which were published

Your enquiry is appreciated, as is your respect for the ethical approach, and I wish you success in obtaining a copy and using some of the great magic it contains.

Regards.

Alan Shaxon
President
The Magic Circle

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The argument of what is and what is not public domain concerning the, Magic of Robert Harbin and other effects by various inventors will most likely be an on-going debate throughout magic.

True, we cannot stop the unauthorized copies of the illusions of different inventors already in circulation, but we can each take the responsibility (as best as possible) upon ourselves to ask the builder if that particular company is authorized to build such an illusion before purchasing and/or to make sure rights are included when purchasing authorized verisions second-hand. From there it will be up to each one's individual standards what approach to take.

HA!!!
If ONLY they had waited until his death!!! The copying was going on long before that.

How about unauthorized copies by reputable builders. I see at least 4 builders here ( http://www.magicauction.com/IllusionHotl......ders.htm )selling Zig Zags. Are they authorized? I'm all for protecting ones creations from unscrupulous builders, but that same scrutiny HAS to apply to the "pros" as well.

All the best,

John

In general, buying the plans also buys the performance rights. Would Paul Osbourne, an inarguably unimpeachably "reputable" source, sell plans that can only be used as artwork?

Owln, why don't you just check with Paul directly as to whether the performance rights are included with the plans. The contact info's on his website (see the sticky post at the top of the forum.) I've bought from him before, he's a good guy- I'm sure he'll be prompt with his response.

"an inarguably unimpeachably "reputable" source"

???????????????????????????????

To compound matters Genii magazine, also published the Zig-zag plans offered by Paul. They also took some heat from this, at the time.

Better by a BIG frame!

AND......let us not forget Paul also produced a set of Interlude plans for sale, which were removed from his site after he was contacted about them. (I know he made them, just not sure who contacted him about them).

Blair Marshall
"ShaZzam!"

Hmm, I was unaware of that. Looks like I didn't do my research (lucky I'm not the one who wants to perform Zig-Zag)... Still, that's rather disconcerting to think I could be buying performance rights from a respected someone who didn't have the right to sell them! Guess I'll stick to buying ones I know are Osbourne's own creations (or ones I design myself.)

That's why its' a tangled web we weave laddie!!

Blair Marshall
"ShaZzam!"

I would like to build the Zig Zag but I don't want to be a (rat) jerk niether. It's so confusing. Wanting to do the right thing.

Can anyone tell me the best way to contact the Magic Circle in England? Is there a website,or an address that I might write to them, and get it from the horses mouth you might say? I will email Paul also and ask him. Thanks Owln

Has Gaughan or Wellington ever made a Zig Zag? I only ask out of curiosity because they are the only "authorized" builders of Origami. If they build knockoff Zig Zags, I see a problem if they raised cain about Origami knockoffs.

This is asked only partially in jest. I also wonder just how long after a man is dead that an "agreement" has to be kept? For all eternity? What happens when the original 50 buyers die and the books are lost? Nobody can ever make a ZIg Zag again?

I think the whole argument is ridiculous. I can think of no other business where such things are argued. In ANY other industry, ideas are used to advance the industry, or at least encourage growth and further creativity. With us, we seem to want to LIMIT the use of ideas!

If the various mechanical aspects of Harbin's "Zig-Zag" had been patented, that patent would have expired in 1987 - 20 years ago. Harbin did not patent the "Zig-Zag" illusion, but if he had, his protection under patent law would long be gone. The copyright of the Harbin book will remain legally effective until sometime in 2027 (if I recall correctly); after that, anyone (likely Dover) can create copies for sale in printed (or e-book) form.

Meanwhile, there are hundreds of nearly exact copies of the Harbin book that were counterfeited shortly after the original came out. If you own a copy that looks like an original, but is not signed, it is probably a fake. Ironically, the fakes are now also rare, and therefore collectible - though not nearly as valuable as the real thing. If the information contained in the Harbin book is all you are after, you need merely become a member of the Academy of Magical Arts in Los Angeles and you can then study the book within the confines of the Magic Castle library - though the last time I looked at their copy it was a bit worse for wear. Alternately, the Library of Congress in D.C. may very well have a copy available for study.

As for the "Zig-Zag" itself, the terms set forth in the Harbin book could be - at best - defined as a "contract of adhesion", and were never legally binding. Many, many builders - including myself - have constructed "Zig-Zags" over the decades since it was first introduced. In my own defense, when I built my versions I had no knowledge of Robert Harbin; the basic design and rough measurements I got directly from John Pomeroy (in Seattle), and he never told me the origins of the prop. Virtually every known and respected prop builder has built a "Zig-Zag" or two, and (as mentioned above) the plans are currently available from Paul Osborne.

It's reasonable to think that there are thousands of "Zig-Zags" in the field today, many seeing regular use in performance. After a while, the question of whether or not it is ethical to build or own an "unauthorized" version must become a bit moot. The land my house sits on was once "owned" by native Alaskans. Were there various unethical and/or immoral shenanigans in the past that caused that ownership to eventually fall to me? Probably. But you can only go back so far before trying to right the wrongs of the past becomes impossible; and it often seems as if yesterday's "wrongs" become today's rights.

Usually material falls into the public domain purely through the passage of time. But sometimes it falls into the public domain because the proper steps weren't taken to prevent that. The defunct trademarked name "Aspirin" is a good example of the latter, and Harbin's "Zig-Zag" represents an example of this in our field. I personally think that raising too much of a fuss over the in-excess-of-500 "Zig-Zags" at this late date is very much like locking the barn door after the horse had been stolen.

Sometimes that’s just the way it is.

TW

http://www.themagiccircle.co.uk is their web site.

The copyright on the Harbin book is one that has several points of interest. When the book was originally published, there was a clause in US copyright law that ANY book published in the English language which was not published in the US was in the public domain. Publication does not, in this case, mean the actual printing. There just needed to be a publishing house of record.

This is why major publishing houses, such as Grosset and Dunlap or Random House will have notices on their title pages that say things like "London -- New York -- Toronto."

Some English magic book publishers, such as Supreme, had reciprocal arrangements with Abbott's. Others, such as Harry Stanley had arrangements with Tannen's. This is why many magic books that are printed in England have stickers on the title page that proclaim that they were published by Tannen's or Abbott's.

The Harbin book was not simultaneously published in the US and the UK. So legally speaking, the book was in the public domain. This was a major oversight on Harbin's part. He should have been aware of the adverse effect this would have, but he trusted magicians' ethics (bad mistake!), and did not do it.

That is why nobody was able to prosecute Al Mann for the counterfeit Harbin books.

Normally, this would be a permanent situation. However, in 1994, the US became a signatory to the Berne copyright agreement and now recognizes those old copyrights. In 1994, the restoration of copyright act was accepted as part of the Uruguay Rounds concerning the World Trade Organization, and US publishers started paying royalties on works that were in the public domain in this country but not in their home countries. These included such material as copyrights from iron curtain countries and other countries that we had never had such agreements with before.

So, it is now illegal to make bogus copies of the Harbin book. Before then it was just immoral and unethical. The maximum that the Magic Circle could possibly recover under this act would be three years' back royalties.

So, it may be legal to make bogus Zig Zags. But it is definitely immoral. Of course, trying to enforce this is very much like trying to put toothpaste back into the tube. It just won't work.

But you know whether your conscience is clear.

I rather doubt that the original 500 books will be "lost." Indeed, many of the original purchasers have sold their copies (that's how I got mine) or, sadly, their copies were sold by the executors of their estates. I suspect that some copies have legally changed hands more than one time.

No, they will probably not be lost (although I'll bet all 50 originals cannot be found even now.) I was using an absurd example to make my point that we are arguing something that has no real consequence. The Zig Zags are out there. You can't force the genie back into the bottle.

This is really interesting to me. I had no idea that this wasn't public domain. I have NEVER heard of an illusion builder that wouldn't make you a zig-zag if you had the $$$. I guess people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for ethics...I just think they should apply to everybody.

Mad Jack

500......500......500...... original copies.

Blair Marshall
"ShaZzam!"

Bill Palmer you have entirely too much information stuffed into your brain... Kind of like an endless supply of final loads...

Magically, Walt

So, let me get this straight. That would mean that Owen Magic, Wellington, David Mendoza, Chalet Magic, Abbotts Magic, Tannens Magic, Rich Hill, Magic Makers, Richard Sherry, Oz Illusions, Illusion Store, Snap Illusions, Jim Sommers, Illusion Concepts, The Illusion Makers, and Bruce Chadwick have built unauthorized Zig Zags. Interesting.