(Close Window)
Topic: Digital Dissolve Inquiry
Message: Posted by: sahunhong (Sep 24, 2007 04:24PM)
I love this effect... I'm planning to purchase this, but have one question: I've just upgraded to silver coins (Walkers, YAY!!), and I was wondering if the SS accomodates a milled-down half (the one that comes with it), or any half dollar (I want to use Walkers).

Thanks in advance!
Sahun Hong
Message: Posted by: professorwhut (Sep 24, 2007 06:20PM)
I just tried this a regular Walking Liberty Coin.
Fits just fine, only you must remember that a walking liberty is pure silver.
This may not be an issue.

PM me if you do not know what I am talking about.
Message: Posted by: sahunhong (Sep 24, 2007 06:34PM)
I think I know... oreo sandwich?

Is it much less noticeable with the clad halves (if so, by how much)? And, does Digital Dissolve come with a clad Kennedy or a '64?

Thank you!
SH

P.S. BJ Bueno does this with a Walker.
Message: Posted by: professorwhut (Sep 24, 2007 06:48PM)
Yes, on the oreo.
Mine came with a 1971 half.

There is a difference, though only slight with the walking liberty.

I did not know that BJ used a Walker.
Message: Posted by: sahunhong (Sep 24, 2007 08:12PM)
But then... I'm still concerned.. when you do the thumb display won't they notice?!?
Message: Posted by: professorwhut (Sep 24, 2007 09:14PM)
Will anyone notice? I do not know.
At any rate, this is a wonderful effect, you should experiment with both halves and see.

Good Luck.
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Sep 24, 2007 09:42PM)
Why not just buy a unmilled walker? it cost merely 5 dollars
Message: Posted by: sahunhong (Sep 24, 2007 09:53PM)
I HAVE walkers.. the part I haven't purchased yet is Digital Dissolve.

SH
Message: Posted by: Pathian (Sep 25, 2007 12:16AM)
My DD came with neither a clad Kennedy nor a '64 actually. Mine came with a '69, which was from a period of years where Kennedys were made of about 40% silver. The silver content near the faces are about 80% so they are close to the appearance of a true silver coin. The copper content increases as you get to the center, but there is never any copper color visible as you would see with a clad coin. In any case, I replaced mine with a normal Walker because I like the look better. Perfect fit.

I've found that the "oreo" issue isn't really ever a problem. The proper angle for the trick is slightly above, so the edges don't get seen very easily. And even while you do the formal display, the eye is more attracted to the brilliant silver than it is to whatever is on the edge.
Message: Posted by: sahunhong (Sep 25, 2007 12:37AM)
TY Pathian.

SH
Message: Posted by: Aaron Isaacs (Sep 25, 2007 08:57AM)
I have found that using the Walker actually hides the SS better than the Kennedy it came with.
Message: Posted by: Kyf (Sep 26, 2007 07:06AM)
Hi,

I use it with a Walker - mine came with clad Kennedy.

The ORIGINAL has a much nicer finish to the SS.

Kyf
Message: Posted by: Kyf (Sep 26, 2007 11:51AM)
You should also note the discussion on

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=163349&forum=202&224

before buying DD.


Kyf
Message: Posted by: jimmyj (Sep 26, 2007 05:34PM)
Kyf,
Am I mistaken, or have you purchased Digital Dissolve from Theory 11?
Thanks for your time.

Jim.
Message: Posted by: Kyf (Sep 27, 2007 01:31AM)
Hi Jimmyj,

Yes, I was sadly naive when I saw the Digital Dissolve teaser and deluded by their hype.

When I found the effect was in fact Steve Dusheck's Copper Silver Transposition and the Gaff was created by Steve - I got pretty darn annoyed.

Anyone that releases an effect has two options - passing off something as their own (words like "invented by" and "unique" are clear definitions - Digital Dissolve is neither" - or to give due credit, get appropriate permissions and pay whatever negociated royalties with the original inventors.

Magic, sadly, is less that honourable on that score and there are thousands of people taken in by cheap and "instant" effects.

What is particularly hypocritical is the opening lines on the DVD state

"Imagine that you created a new kind of flavoured popsicle frozen dessert. Maybe it's a cross between watermelon and crab.

"Now let's theoretically assume that I invented a "popsicle cloning machine" that I used to "rip" your creation and create billions of illegal copies of your tasty dessert that I then distributed in the middle of New York. You'd be unhappy.

"Well, ripping this DVD is pretty much the same thing. And probably contributes to global warming, and/or herpes, and/or really bad feelings about yourself, you thieving communist. (Section 11.4.3 Theory 11 handbook of warnings)."

I've asked what is DIFFERENT in Digital Dissolve to Steve's Original and had nothing but waffle and weasel words.

After learning of my mistake in doing business with Theory 11 I sought out the original product and appologized to the inventor. I hope others can learn from my mistake.

Steve Dusheck is a GREAT guy, a real magical innovator and his effects deserve more than this blatent rip-off attitude, hypocracy and marketing hype.

For further comment on this see

http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=163349&forum=202&start=210

Kyf
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Sep 27, 2007 01:03PM)
I confess that I too bought DD.

Now, what to do?

Sell it, and so "prevent more sales to T11?"

Keep it, but pay SD for the routine as well [I actually already have the original gaff]

Both of the above?
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Sep 27, 2007 01:46PM)
I think if you already haev it you got two choices

1. return it they have a 2 week policy

2. at the very least buy steve's routine.

=)
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Sep 27, 2007 01:51PM)
Rutabaga, do you also already have Steve's lecture DVD? If not... a great purchase and learning experience. :) AND you get to make contact with a great guy.
Message: Posted by: bugjack (Sep 27, 2007 01:52PM)
If you already have the original gaff, why not just return it?
Message: Posted by: Kyf (Sep 27, 2007 02:01PM)
[quote]
On 2007-09-27 14:03, rutabaga wrote:
I confess that I too bought DD.

Now, what to do?

Sell it, and so "prevent more sales to T11?"

Keep it, but pay SD for the routine as well [I actually already have the original gaff]

Both of the above?
[/quote]

I threw it in the bin - very annoyed at the blatent rip-off and lack of respect.

Then tracked down the original, apologised to Steve for being taken in by the marketing hype - he replied and was very informative and helpful, bought his DVD and ORIGINAL gaff.

You know the saying - a happy customer tells one or two people - but an unhappy customer will tell everyone....

Kyf
Message: Posted by: sahunhong (Sep 27, 2007 06:00PM)
Mmm.. should have given it to me :D

SH

P.S. Don't take me wrong, I respect every ORIGINAL magic creator.
Message: Posted by: Tom G (Sep 27, 2007 07:15PM)
Kyf, you must have got the last gaff from Steve as he no longer sells them. So here's the question. I have/had one of the original Copper/Silver Transpo's from the 70's. Still in the original plastic bag. I have looked everywhere and can only think it didn't make the trip during a recent move. I've gone through my bins countless times. Not wanting to support the rip off..... there doesn't seem to be any options. If someone has a good idea, please let me know.
Tom
Message: Posted by: jimbowmanjr (Sep 27, 2007 09:13PM)
I actually inquired to Schoolcraft about the availability of the gimmick needed for the C/S Transo and was told if I wanted it I would need to get it through T11, or wait until December or later. Not many options available in all honesty as Lassen is probably the only other reliable source I know of for quality coins.

--Jim
Message: Posted by: John T Cox (Sep 27, 2007 11:00PM)
I found the same when I contacted Schoolcraft. I guess they are busy making them for T11
Message: Posted by: Kyf (Sep 28, 2007 01:39AM)
Hi,

This is terrible - then it's a rip-off with a single source.

Dunno about you folks - but that does seem like they owe Steve something in all of this.

BTW - you can make the gaff from an expanded shell - I just converted one of my Morgan Silver Dollars into a Slippery Sam - but you GOTTA be good with your hands and tools.

PM me if you want details.


Kyf
Message: Posted by: sahunhong (Sep 28, 2007 01:57AM)
Same here!

I'm disappointed in Schoolcraft ATM :(

Kyf,

Do you think an e[ EngPenny shell from Hopping Half would work out? Give me a message on Skype (Sahun Hong) or MSN messenger (Mathnerd718@hotmail.com)

Thanks!!!
Sahun
Message: Posted by: Kyf (Sep 28, 2007 02:13AM)
Hi,

I suggest anyone interested in this should get Steve's DVD - it's still advertised and he described his copper/silver routine, the gaff and details of many other wonderful effects - all of which are described as "Things you can make"....

Sahun, hi,

You can pick up an expanded penny shell (check google) for around $20 - $25.

If you buy that and Steve's original work (1982 lectures) you get a HEAP more value than the DD DVD.

Also Steve is a very nice guy and has produced (and was selling) over 300 different effects - it's worth doing a little bit of research just to find out about his enormous contribution to the world of magic.

Kyf
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Oct 14, 2007 12:49AM)
Quick question. Does anyone carry theirs in a Scotch & Soda leather pouch? I was thinking about trying it, but wasn't sure how safe the gimmick would be in there while in your pocket.
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 14, 2007 01:13AM)
Lee Asher is involved in this, so I'm surprised at these issues raised as Lee is quiet a stickler on ethics in magic.
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Oct 14, 2007 06:21AM)
Here's Desouza's take on the whole thing. Since he was the head of ethics for the SAM, I think his word carries a little weight:

"Hi All,

First, to JTW, I do not claim any authority on anything in magic, however, I know the history on this matter. Please pay attention to what you are about to read, because I do not intend to post on this issue again. You will not hear any rebuttal to these facts from Fulves, Elliott or Guitar, because to do so would be a lie. Steve Dusheck created the sliding shell in the mid-60's. He sold one of the first ones to J.G. Thompson. He gave Eddie Gibson of England the right to manufacture and market the idea with Steve's Slippery Sam routine in 1970. Gibson marketed it and the copyright date on the instructions is 1971. Bob Elliott bought a set and worked out his routine. Karl Fulves asked for permission to publish it, which he did in Pallbearer's Review. BTW, for BJ's information, that magazine did not exist in the 50's. Fulves claimed that the idea for the sliding shell was old, but when challenged on that fact, he later recanted and admitted that Dusheck created it.

Steve showed his routine to Don Alan. Pressley Guitar was there and freaked out over it. He bugged Steve for it and Steve not only showed him the gaff but explained exactly how to make it.

B.J. Bueno spoke to Steve Dusheck several years ago and wanted his permission to market his routine. Steve offered to sell him the gaffs wholesale "As long as he was not marketing it as a Copper/Silver Transposition". B.J. could not do that. He went to Todd Lassen to get the gaffs made, but Lassen did not have Steve's permission to do that. Jamie Schoolcraft asked Steve for permission to make the gaffs for customers. Steve gave him permission on the assumtion that it would be for guys who wanted a special version of the gaff. I don't believe that T11 told Jamie what they wanted the gaffs for, but I cannot attest to that fact for certain. All I know is that I was called by a mutual friend who said that "Jamie is sick over this and wants to talk to Steve to make things right".

I spoke to Steve Duscheck the other evening and he is sick over this whole fiasco. I feel the same way. I find it very distressing that several talented young men who I call friends would stoop to this level of thievery. I have had the pleasure of calling Steve Dusheck my friend for many years. He has helped me over the years in so many ways, not the least of which creating effects specifically for my repertoire. I consider him one of the five most creative men, if not in the entire history of magic, at least in the last 100 years. It is a pity that repeated activities such as this have caused him to retreat from magic. Everyone in our art will suffer for that, instead of being able to enjoy so many more fruits of his labors.

Marc DeSouza"

BJ and T11 have not disputed this post, which is on their forums.
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 14, 2007 11:20AM)
I just wrote Lee Asher about this. He should come here and post and he was involved in this effect.
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Oct 14, 2007 03:13PM)
Good luck with that...
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 14, 2007 05:09PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-14 16:13, rutabaga wrote:
Good luck with that...
[/quote]

He won't respond? Then I'm afraid he will no longer be able to comment about Magic Makers without this coming up.
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Oct 15, 2007 12:00AM)
Anyone have an answer to my question :)
Message: Posted by: Kyf (Oct 15, 2007 02:18AM)
Hi Lunatik,

Your question was off topic which is why I think no-one replied.

I carry all my coins either in leather coin cases (half dollars), JOL cases (dollars) or the small Goshman purses (schoolcraft sets), everything tight and secure for the gaffs - so far no damage.

However I don't bash them around and the coins cases are secured in briefcase/pack when travelling.

The Dusheck Silver/Copper set I carry in a 6 half dollars pocket coin case from emagictricks.co.uk (search on coin case).

Keep everything nested so there is little chance of any damage in transit - the coin case also allows you to hold a metal bang ring in the folds.

Like everything in life - treat it with due respect and you'll get a lifetimes use out of the gaff.

Kyf
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 15, 2007 02:46AM)
Yep, what Kyf does!
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Oct 15, 2007 06:09PM)
Thanks for the reply. But I'm really curious as to how I'm off topic when this topic is about DD. I assume that I would get flamed if I started a whole new topic for such a simple question as to how you would carry these type of coins. Unless I wasn't getting into the discussion as to who really invented the trick and who stole it, then yes I would be totally off topic. At anyrate, I do appreciate all that you wrote and I will give it shot!! Thanks again!
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 15, 2007 06:46PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-14 01:49, lunatik wrote:
Quick question. Does anyone carry theirs in a Scotch & Soda leather pouch? I was thinking about trying it, but wasn't sure how safe the gimmick would be in there while in your pocket.
[/quote]

Here's his question. Anybody have the pouch and want to give him an answer?

I understand your concern for the safety of the gaff and interest in carrying it around. Sorry I don't have a scotch and soda pouch and so can't offer you an answer.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 15, 2007 07:31PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-14 18:09, Christopher Kavanagh wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-10-14 16:13, rutabaga wrote:
Good luck with that...
[/quote]

He won't respond? Then I'm afraid he will no longer be able to comment about Magic Makers without this coming up.
[/quote]

Oh cmon you guys!!!! Lee is an Artist for theory 11. Until you have proof that he is involved with this "thievery" don't point fingers. Just because he doesn't come on here to entertain silly accusations doesn't mean he is guilty. I know for fact that he is very busy right now and traveling. Please don't post rumors about Lee, he has done a lot to fight theft in the current magic market.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 15, 2007 07:45PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-14 12:20, Christopher Kavanagh wrote:
I just wrote Lee Asher about this. He should come here and post and he was involved in this effect.
[/quote]

I don't know about "should".

I doubt he had any interest in so deeply insulting Steve Dusheck or participaing in a team effort to offer a dubious product.
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 15, 2007 09:16PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-15 20:45, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-10-14 12:20, Christopher Kavanagh wrote:
I just wrote Lee Asher about this. He should come here and post and he was involved in this effect.
[/quote]

I don't know about "should".

I doubt he had any interest in so deeply insulting Steve Dusheck or participaing in a team effort to offer a dubious product.
[/quote]

Jonathan, I'm sure Lee has had the most honorable intentions. But....considering how this has turned out and he was involved with it, I think he should come here and discuss it. He does when his creative work is taken without permission.
Message: Posted by: Kyf (Oct 16, 2007 02:19AM)
Hi,

Lee Asher was the producer/director on the "easter egg" clip showing BJ Bueno and his creation "Digital Dissolve".

Lee appears at the end of the clip showing a spinning copper/silver.

As I recall that clip showed BJ Bueno talking about how Bob Elliot showed him the gaff and how Presley Guitar showed him the open thumb display.

Lee Asher is credited with the toss change.

Does anyone have this clip - it's interesting to see how the "invention" and performance is credited by BJ Bueno himself.

No mention in that segment of Steve Dusheck.

Kyf
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 19, 2007 06:53PM)
No word from Lee yet or Theory 11 folks.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 19, 2007 07:38PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-14 12:20, Christopher Kavanagh wrote:
I just wrote Lee Asher about this. He should come here and post and he was involved in this effect.
[/quote]

Did you write to via is regular email?
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 20, 2007 12:59AM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-19 20:38, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-10-14 12:20, Christopher Kavanagh wrote:
I just wrote Lee Asher about this. He should come here and post and he was involved in this effect.
[/quote]

Did you write to via is regular email?
[/quote]

Yes. He always writes back, even when out of the country.
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 20, 2007 12:29PM)
Lee Asher answered my e-mail. I have to keep the contnt confidential, but Lee is taking the matter very serious and the theory11 team is working to resolve the situation.

Good man that Lee Asher!
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Oct 20, 2007 12:43PM)
Sounds promising....I'll wait to see what they decide. In this instance though, silence isn't golden.
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 20, 2007 02:00PM)
Lee is old school and believes in crediting and integrity. My money is on him.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 20, 2007 02:11PM)
Christopher,
Thanks so much for keeping after this as well as keeping us informed!
Mick
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 20, 2007 02:55PM)
Mick, my pleasure. We have a great community here and everyone respects the work of the artists whose shoulders we stand on. It's wonderful to see us all come together for the common good!
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 20, 2007 04:23PM)
I agree!
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 20, 2007 04:26PM)
The folkks at Theory 11 have posted about this on their site:
http://forums.theory11.com/showthread.php?p=24518#post24518
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 20, 2007 06:41PM)
I'm glad all the noise has FINALLY woke someone of high rank at T11 up but I am curious if they have been doing research or has it been damage control and CYA before now?!?!?!?
Again, I am glad that this has not been put to rest and that actions may be taken in Steve's benefit!
Now, where are we on Magic Makers "new" coins and effect.............. :stare:
Mick
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Oct 20, 2007 07:40PM)
Anyone have a problem of the coins talking during the move? for example, the edges of the half dollar grinding against the gimmick. kind of like when you were a kid and stuck a flattened soda can into the spokes of your bicycle to get that cool sound. maybe a bad example lol. ok, the same sound if you would get 2 quarters and rub together the edges. only thing I can think of is to grind down the ridges on the half so that they are semi smooth and will glide softly and silently. any ideas?
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 20, 2007 07:59PM)
Even a sliver of scotch tape should smooth the addon and remove. The Dusheck shove action was so quiet that I don't recall any noise on any gaff set (his slippery sam or his c/s transpo) I forget whether he put sticker on the inside of those sets. Was over twenty years ago.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 20, 2007 08:50PM)
My "anytime" set up uses a clad half with good milling and I have a label type sticker in the SS and have no problems! Also set up so that you show "heads" up at the finger tips for a smoother push maybe less thumb pressure!
Mick
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 20, 2007 09:15PM)
Luna, you are far better off adding a thin sliver of tape or even nail polish to that place on the gaff where it scrapes than doing machine work to the innocent coin.
Message: Posted by: princehal (Oct 20, 2007 11:25PM)
I did this a few times in a performance this evening, and had that happen once.

I got talking in rehearsal, but if I get the angle correct -- no problem. I try to stay aware of that and rotate it a bit.

I almost think the gaff would be better if part of it was smaller, just enough to stop...
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 20, 2007 11:44PM)
I personally think the gaff is brilliant and find that the very little knack needed just takes knowing the orientation of your gear! I play with mine constantly so I know it intuitively!
Mick
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 21, 2007 08:47AM)
The gaff is brilliant and it belongs to Steve Duschek. If Theroy 11 gets Steve's permision ( after he turned them down and they went ahead anyway ) then we can move on. What will not be acceptable is is a mumbo jumbo "spin" on the events.

Theory 11's reputation is hanging on this.
Message: Posted by: princehal (Oct 21, 2007 09:46AM)
I don't disagree Mickey, it is brilliant, I was just muttering out loud.

Also I agree about Theory 11. I will not purchase anything else from them, unless this is resolved well.

If the gaff becomes available in a proper way, I will try to purchase it. I bought mine before the controversy was established. I wrestle with the ethics of using it, but indeed I did use it it a few times in a performance last night. I know folks will think less of me because of this, but I admit it freely because it is truth. Perhaps a few years from now, when my arsenal is larger I would easily toss it away. This time, I could not bring myself to do that because of the brilliance of what I had in my hands.

I feel a bit victimized myself in this, having to wrestle with ethics while, at the same time, wishing to use something I purchased. I feel like I have a hot car, and I still need to get to work. I hate being put in this position, and will be loath to buy anything from anyone that is a new release. How can I know it's not a rip-off? Or that someone will not complain at some point.
Message: Posted by: jimbowmanjr (Oct 22, 2007 08:23AM)
Even if this is resolved, although I am not sure how this could be resolved at this point aside from completely removing the product, I still have zero intentions of ever buying anything from there.

What would have been prudent on Theory11's part would have been to suspend the further sale of said item until the matter was resolved. I sincerely hope that Steve does NOT give them his permission simply because of the way they went about pushing this effect onto the market.

I could really care less at this point as I am just disgusted overall with how this entire thing was handled in addition to the artists involved with it all. They might have some great magicians in their lineup but they have some pretty **** poor businessmen in their lineup as well.

--Jim
Message: Posted by: atigu (Oct 22, 2007 01:27PM)
I've been thinking the same thing since I saw J.Bayme's more or less useless post, some pointless PR line about having looked into it for a month with a whole team of so called specialists, and they still haven't gotten anywhere close to a conclusion it seems (this "full month" of research should ofcourse simply have been done before releasing the product at all).

The only thing I with my small head can manage to get out of that message is simply that they're admitting that the "accusations" may be well deserved, hence they haven't done their job properly from the start, and since the ceo is so sincerely admitting to this possibility, absolutely without a doubt should have suspended the sales once they started having doubts about themselves (one full month ago). This is sad..


Probably a bunch of typos in there, I'm not english.
And a little yay! I finally made a post, after lurking in the shadows for ages.
hi hi folks :)
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Oct 22, 2007 04:27PM)
So, I see the young CEO has finally spoken up as a captain of industry...And spoke a bit too canned for my taste, sorta like what a CEO would sound like in explaining such a situation. Still hasn't said much of anything except stay tuned and basically we're sorry we did this and you guys caught us on it. ;)

Wonder what "research" has taken them all this long to figure out or re-construe??? All the background has been in this conversation here, from topflite guys including Dusheck himself. So just who are they checking with? Just think, if no noise here, then these same folks go on as usual, No blood-No foul-No kiddin'! ;) Interesting.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 23, 2007 11:53AM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-22 14:27, atigu wrote:
I've been thinking the same thing since I saw J.Bayme's more or less useless post, some pointless PR line about having looked into it for a month with a whole team of so called specialists, and they still haven't gotten anywhere close to a conclusion it seems (this "full month" of research should ofcourse simply have been done before releasing the product at all).

The only thing I with my small head can manage to get out of that message is simply that they're admitting that the "accusations" may be well deserved, hence they haven't done their job properly from the start, and since the ceo is so sincerely admitting to this possibility, absolutely without a doubt should have suspended the sales once they started having doubts about themselves (one full month ago). This is sad..


Probably a bunch of typos in there, I'm not english.
And a little yay! I finally made a post, after lurking in the shadows for ages.
hi hi folks :)
[/quote]

I like how your first post on the Café is on this topic...

Asher, Kenner, Fisher, Houchin, Etc. Those names aren't special(ist) enough for you?

I am by no means involved in any of the "talks" or negotiating that is going on with the digital dissolve thing. But, after reading the thread that got deleted and from what I've heard through the grapevine, Steve D. can be difficult to deal with. Give this thing some time guys. If you start getting bored go look at some current world events and worry about things that really matter. But if you must focus on a freakin coin trick then keep in mind that AT LEAST THEORY 11 IS DOING SOMETHING!!! That is more than a I can say for a lot of other magicians and manufacturers...
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 23, 2007 11:58AM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-23 12:53, Hart Keene wrote:...I've heard through the grapevine, Steve D. can be difficult to deal with....That is more than a I can say for a lot of other magicians and manufacturers...
[/quote]

He was asked. He said NO. Sorry your buddy was involved.
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Oct 23, 2007 12:00PM)
Hart,

You take on this is mind-boggling.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 23, 2007 12:01PM)
Pod, sad to see that someone does not understand that no means no ... it starts to look like the rape analogy may hold as suitable after all.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 23, 2007 01:35PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-23 12:58, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-10-23 12:53, Hart Keene wrote:...I've heard through the grapevine, Steve D. can be difficult to deal with....That is more than a I can say for a lot of other magicians and manufacturers...
[/quote]

He was asked. He said NO. Sorry your buddy was involved.
[/quote]

When did I say my buddy was involved? I am playing devils advocate here...or trying. None of you know EXACTLY what is/has gone on so why all the finger pointing?
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Oct 23, 2007 02:09PM)
Uh....yes we do. It's documented. The co-chair of ethics for the SAM came on here and said that we were right. What legs does your "devil's advocate" table have to stand on?
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 23, 2007 02:48PM)
Folks,

IMHO the devil has enough advocates as is.

Maybe we can leave the role playing to those who know how to read a script and take direction?

J
Message: Posted by: atigu (Oct 23, 2007 04:05PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-23 12:53, Hart Keene wrote:
[quote]


Asher, Kenner, Fisher, Houchin, Etc. Those names aren't special(ist) enough for you?
[/quote]


Well let me put it this way, I always thought they where (atleast Asher and Fisher), but from what I can tell atm it seems like I may have been mistaken (a month and who knows how much time before release they spent on researching and it's done nothing for them).
Ofcourse they might actually be experts and simply just thieves..

I'm still hoping atleast 2 of my "heroes" (you should be able to guess who) somehow ends up actually having no blame in this at all in some strange way (I'm thinking they're only "artists" and I'll keep it like that in my head for a while longer atleast).

And yes you are right in that T11 actually does something, and something of that something is wrongdoings..

Btw. it's still for sale which I still think is wrong no matter what names you throw at my face ;)
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 23, 2007 06:41PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-23 13:00, podcastrant wrote:
Hart,

You take on this is mind-boggling.
[/quote]

Oh is it? I didn't know that I had "a take". Do you know exactly what is/has gone on? I am simply saying that we should wait for things to pan out before starting a witch hunt. A lot of good reputations can get tainted by rumors that circulate here on the Café. That is all I'm saying...

Once again these are artists that have a perfect track record and some have even done more than all of you put together to stop theft. Just take it easy...
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 23, 2007 06:55PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-23 15:09, podcastrant wrote:
Uh....yes we do. It's documented. The co-chair of ethics for the SAM came on here and said that we were right. What legs does your "devil's advocate" table have to stand on?
[/quote]

Well then kill them all!!!!!! Asher, Fisher, BJ, Houchin, all of em! Let me grab my hood and cloak. Did you guys remember rope? Less messy...what about torches? Do you think it will be dark?

These guys were never going to release any more original magic anyway! They would have just continued to lie, steel, and cheat! Kill em all! Oh yeah, there is documentation that Copperfield raped some girl! We don't need to wait for that to pan out! Lets be rid of him while were at it! He must be connected to theory 11 as well because of his connection with Kenner!;)
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 23, 2007 07:09PM)
***I've heard through the grapevine, Steve D. can be difficult to deal with....***
Hart,
I'm not even going to get into the facts and figures and who is or isn't etc.
However I will address your statement by saying that my experience with Mr Steve Dusheck has always been wonderful! Not only is he one of the most innovative minds in magic but also one of the most generous, even after being ripped off as much as he has! Where as Steve has been extremely kind and giving to me (and many others) I doubt I could be as gracious if I were in his shoes!
As for waiting for things to pan out......... I will ask once again, does it take this long for T11 to gather the facts they should have gathered BEFORE releasing DD or is it taking this long to get certain ducks in a row for CYA purposes?
Just my opinion!
Mick
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 23, 2007 07:29PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-23 20:09, MickeyPainless wrote:
***I've heard through the grapevine, Steve D. can be difficult to deal with....***
Hart,
I'm not even going to get into the facts and figures and who is or isn't etc.
However I will address your statement by saying that my experience with Mr Steve Dusheck has always been wonderful! Not only is he one of the most innovative minds in magic but also one of the most generous, even after being ripped off as much as he has! Where as Steve has been extremely kind and giving to me (and many others) I doubt I could be as gracious if I were in his shoes!
As for waiting for things to pan out......... I will ask once again, does it take this long for T11 to gather the facts they should have gathered BEFORE releasing DD or is it taking this long to get certain ducks in a row for CYA purposes?
Just my opinion!
Mick
[/quote]

Just want to say that I have never met Steve D. in person. I was simply stating hearsay(from another thread and a few anonymous folks). But isn't that what all of you are doing regarding this theory 11 fiasco?
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 23, 2007 07:50PM)
Just want to say that I am not taking sides though it might appear so. Just didn't want rumors to taint good people. Since I have "appeared" to be on one side of the fence I will now step over to other side by saying that I do find it funny that it is still for sale. If I was in charge I might pull it for the time being...but I'm not in charge...
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 23, 2007 07:58PM)
***But isn't that what all of you are doing regarding this theory 11 fiasco?***

What, going on hearsay? No, I can't speak for anyone else but I have based my opinions on stated and written facts.
Mick
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Oct 23, 2007 08:28PM)
Hart,

I'm sorry you missed the 12to14 page thread that originally discussed this. It is in cleaning now by Café staff and hopefully will be put back up soon. Please excuse those of us that find your arguments ridiculous since they have already been disproved by Steve Duschek and Marc Desouza (among countless others).

Your asinine comment regarding my comment that the co-chair of ethics for the SAM came on here and said it was a rip-off, I guess was your attempt at sarcasm. It fell short.

Kenner doesn't really have that great a reputation (on this board at least) for ethics. Since he took an idea of Jonathan Townsend's added a few things (including an unpublished Latta move for the last vanish that he didn't ask permission to publish) and released it without permission.

In his original ThreeFly pamphlet he states that it had been a pet routine of his since 1986. I find this funny since all documentation from Jonathan says that he showed it to Kenner in 1987. How could it have been a pet routine of his a year before Jonathan showed it to him?

If you watch Kenner's history of ThreeFly on COINvention you'll see that he said it was some time after Jonathan showed it to him that he perfected his routine. So this would put his dating in the instructions off even more

We've done our research, now you do yours.
Message: Posted by: jimbowmanjr (Oct 23, 2007 08:59PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-23 20:29, Hart Keene wrote:

Just want to say that I have never met Steve D. in person. I was simply stating hearsay(from another thread and a few anonymous folks). But isn't that what all of you are doing regarding this theory 11 fiasco?
[/quote]

But you don't want any good reputations tainted here right? I am disappointed that Lee hasn't come forward which is who I have heard gone to great lengths to fight this type of thing from happening period. I am sure there are at least two guys involved with that place that are biting their tongues and unplugging their keyboards to avoid responding to this issue publicly. I hope something is done about this soon and I thought the product would have at least been pulled by now. Even JB said they bagged an entire run of Guardian decks because they weren't the way they wanted them, which I would wager is worth quite a bit more than whatever stock they have sitting on the shelves for this release.

At any rate we can only state out disappointment so many times until it becomes repetitive and ends up falling on deaf ears. I will let my wallet do the talking from now on.

--Jim
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 23, 2007 09:12PM)
Let us suppose that all the parties involved now know what's up.

It's difficult enough to apologize in the best of times and circumstances.

On one of the deleted threads you [b]can[/b] read how even SteveD can come across as less than gracious when feeling cornered and stressed and then confronted with an awkwardly phrased note from somebody (SteveF).

Let's not ask others to make a bad situation smell like roses.

Okay?
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 24, 2007 11:48AM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-23 21:28, podcastrant wrote:
Hart,

I'm sorry you missed the 12to14 page thread that originally discussed this. It is in cleaning now by Café staff and hopefully will be put back up soon. Please excuse those of us that find your arguments ridiculous since they have already been disproved by Steve Duschek and Marc Desouza (among countless others).

Your asinine comment regarding my comment that the co-chair of ethics for the SAM came on here and said it was a rip-off, I guess was your attempt at sarcasm. It fell short.

Kenner doesn't really have that great a reputation (on this board at least) for ethics. Since he took an idea of Jonathan Townsend's added a few things (including an unpublished Latta move for the last vanish that he didn't ask permission to publish) and released it without permission.

In his original ThreeFly pamphlet he states that it had been a pet routine of his since 1986. I find this funny since all documentation from Jonathan says that he showed it to Kenner in 1987. How could it have been a pet routine of his a year before Jonathan showed it to him?

If you watch Kenner's history of ThreeFly on COINvention you'll see that he said it was some time after Jonathan showed it to him that he perfected his routine. So this would put his dating in the instructions off even more

We've done our research, now you do yours.
[/quote]

You have obviously made up your mind about theory 11 and its artists. You are entitled to your opinion and I respect that. You can now refrain from buying or affiliating yourself with anything that is or has to do with theory 11.

As for myself...What theory 11 does in the next few weeks will show us what kind of company they really are, and it will speak louder than anyone here...
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Oct 24, 2007 12:15PM)
I didn't give you opinion. Dispute anything I've said above with facts.
I gave you references so you can check for yourself.

Your assumptions that I have made up mind about T11 and it's artists is wrong as well. I haven't commented about T11 or their artists as a whole. I've only talked about BJ specifically and mentioned that Kenner's reputation is not perfect either.

I gave you facts that you can check for yourself. You are the one spouting opinion.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 24, 2007 01:13PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-24 13:15, podcastrant wrote:
I didn't give you opinion. Dispute anything I've said above with facts.
I gave you references so you can check for yourself.

Your assumptions that I have made up mind about T11 and it's artists is wrong as well. I haven't commented about T11 or their artists as a whole. I've only talked about BJ specifically and mentioned that Kenner's reputation is not perfect either.

I gave you facts that you can check for yourself. You are the one spouting opinion.
[/quote]

I just didn't want this to turn into a witch hunt. If someone did make a mistake then I think they should be able to attempt to fix it. Also, we don't know the extent to which parties-or members of parties were involved. If theory 11 were doing nothing to TRY and resolve the situation then I could see boycotting them or whatever. But if they tell us that they are trying to resolve it then we should give them the benefit of the doubt, for now. They haven't given me a reason not to believe them.
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Oct 24, 2007 01:16PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-20 13:43, podcastrant wrote:
Sounds promising....I'll wait to see what they decide. In this instance though, silence isn't golden.
[/quote]

If you look earlier in the thread, you'll see that I feel the same way. I'm waiting to see what they say, but I won't wait forever.

It looks like on this aspect, we agree.
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Oct 24, 2007 01:32PM)
Lets cool down gang, I for one am going to wait and hope that the t11 folks do the right thing. what that is exactly is up to the real creators.
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Oct 24, 2007 01:56PM)
I agree...The one thing I hate about discussing things on forum boards is the lack of ability to know the tone that someone is trying to express.

My comments usually come off as heated, but trust me they're not. I just have a pointed way of expressing myself. Hopefully, I'll get to meet some of you guys and you'll see what I mean.

My family and I have many "spirited" debates. After my wife first had a dinner with my family, she asked me if we fought like that all of the time. I said, "Fighting?! Girl we were just having a discussion." It used to make her uneasy, but she's used to it now. I have to remind myself that not everyone goes at it with their friends and family like we do.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 24, 2007 03:51PM)
Re: [quote]But if they tell us that they are trying to resolve it then we should give them the benefit of the doubt, for now. They haven't given me a reason not to believe them.[/quote]

They gave me sufficient cause to wonder about the bunch of them at the start of September.

It's almost the start of November and I'm still wondering.

But I also wonder if leopards can change their spots.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 24, 2007 05:19PM)
[quote]
wonder about the bunch of them

[/quote]

Once again I don't know if grouping "them" together is the best thing. Should I not like the Atlanta Falcons because Michael Vick was into dogfighting? Do we really know the extent of "fault" with each member of theory 11? If you guys are into the whole "guilty by association" thing so be it...
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 24, 2007 06:45PM)
Okay, let's not lump the theory11 gang with the folks who do dog fighting.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 25, 2007 11:56AM)
I was using that as a comparison...lol

Lets not lump them(theory 11 individuals) together with the digital dissolve fiasco. We don't know how involved each member is...
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 25, 2007 12:03PM)
Were someone in my family to put the dirty wash in the window or to go yelling obscenities out the window I'd expect to be looked at funny on the street and asked by all and sundry ... for a while. It's called shame.

I'm sorry Mat Bich is anywhere close to this.

If anything I suggest folks step back and see where this goes comes thanksgiving. I'd like to have reason to think good things about those guys and their project.
Message: Posted by: John T Cox (Oct 25, 2007 12:18PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-21 10:46, princehal wrote:
I feel a bit victimized myself in this, having to wrestle with ethics while, at the same time, wishing to use something I purchased.
[/quote]

This is a tough call to make. I too bought one of these only knowing/caring a little about the controversy at the time. My consciousness on the subject has been raised considerably. Personally, I will not throw it away because of the lack of proper crediting and permissions. Each has to decide that issue personally. It's a beautiful effect and I think more global good would come from showing the effect and then crediting Steve Dusheck than a purely personal, symbolic, throwing away of the gaff.
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 26, 2007 10:21PM)
I wrote Theory 11 again and asked them to do the right thing. They have a tarnished reputation now. Anytime they come to the Café for a "big" announcement, this will haunt them, just like the stars of Magic Makers when they announce projects.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 26, 2007 11:30PM)
I wonder if you'll get a reply or a form letter Chris?!?!? I just peeked at the topic over there and it seems people are really starting to question T11 and their ethics. The baffling part to me as a business man is WHY risk so much over so little profit? Run the numbers..... Sale price 35 bucks minus cost of gaffus minus advertising and packaging minus DVD production minus, minus, minus then add in all the expense of a start up company. The risk to reward ratio seems radically imbalanced IMO! Makes me wonder who wrote their business plan!
Mick
Message: Posted by: jimbowmanjr (Oct 27, 2007 12:09AM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-27 00:30, MickeyPainless wrote:
I wonder if you'll get a reply or a form letter Chris?!?!? I just peeked at the topic over there and it seems people are really starting to question T11 and their ethics. The baffling part to me as a business man is WHY risk so much over so little profit? Run the numbers..... Sale price 35 bucks minus cost of gaffus minus advertising and packaging minus DVD production minus, minus, minus then add in all the expense of a start up company. The risk to reward ratio seems radically imbalanced IMO! Makes me wonder who wrote their business plan!
Mick
[/quote]

My thoughts are right in line with yours Mickey. Actually the thread "What is different about Digital Dissolve?" is usually bumped or provoked by the same people and generally dies otherwise, much to the appreciation of the T11 staff I am sure. It is the attitude of indifference by the community over there that bothers me the most. What is even more tiresome is that people are continuing to buy it without even looking into the reviews and questions surrounding it first.

It is my guess...and this is just a guess is that the folks over there are banking on that attitude of indifference to keep their company afloat. It is sad to say that they are probably betting on the winning horse. There are more than likely many more people who could care less than there are who actually care about what actually happened with that release. You don't have to look much farther than the discussions here on the Café and over there to notice that it is always the same people raising the questions. My prediction is that there will be no real resolution to this debacle and the people who buy from them could care less one way or the other anyways, win-win for them I guess.

--Jim
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 27, 2007 12:53AM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-27 00:30, MickeyPainless wrote:
I wonder if you'll get a reply or a form letter Chris?!?!? I just peeked at the topic over there and it seems people are really starting to question T11 and their ethics. The baffling part to me as a business man is WHY risk so much over so little profit? Run the numbers..... Sale price 35 bucks minus cost of gaffus minus advertising and packaging minus DVD production minus, minus, minus then add in all the expense of a start up company. The risk to reward ratio seems radically imbalanced IMO! Makes me wonder who wrote their business plan!
Mick
[/quote]

I got a personal reply the first time and Lee Asher wrote me.

But...they are still selling it.
Message: Posted by: RCP (Oct 27, 2007 04:05PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-23 12:53, Hart Keene wrote:...I've heard through the grapevine, Steve D. can be difficult to deal with....
[/quote]

What does that mean? Someone wants his idea and he says NO, so he is difficult. When someone tried to steal my wallet once they found me “difficult to deal with”.

I have only had two dealings with Mr. Dusheck. I inquired about an old trick, no longer available, so he sent me the instructions for free and at his expense. I recently ordered his DVD and manuscripts, his wife sent me my check back and apologized that his health would not allow him to fill my order. Then he sent me his DVD and a nice note for FREE and at his expense. Difficult to deal with? I don’t think so!
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 27, 2007 05:01PM)
RCP,
Steve must have thought he was sending it to the gal in your pic! LOL
You're absolutely right, he is a prince of a guy and hopefully wrongs will be righted and credits be credited where credits are due!
GREAT DVD aye?
Mick
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 28, 2007 12:01PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-27 17:05, RCP wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-10-23 12:53, Hart Keene wrote:...I've heard through the grapevine, Steve D. can be difficult to deal with....
[/quote]

What does that mean? Someone wants his idea and he says NO, so he is difficult. When someone tried to steal my wallet once they found me “difficult to deal with”.

I have only had two dealings with Mr. Dusheck. I inquired about an old trick, no longer available, so he sent me the instructions for free and at his expense. I recently ordered his DVD and manuscripts, his wife sent me my check back and apologized that his health would not allow him to fill my order. Then he sent me his DVD and a nice note for FREE and at his expense. Difficult to deal with? I don’t think so!
[/quote]

What Hart is trying to say is that if someone on the street asks to borrow your car and you say no, it's now acceptable for them to steal it. I agree. As long as they first asked nicely, you forfeit all rights to your property.

Steve D. is a sweetheart of a guy.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Oct 28, 2007 10:15PM)
Hey, if you can aggravate the car owner enough that they go away does that mean you get full credit for the stuff you are using of theirs?

On the serious side, let's hang till thanksgiving and see where we are then. It's really a bad thing to get people feeling cornered or hounded.
Message: Posted by: Steve Dusheck (Oct 28, 2007 10:57PM)
If people are going to claim I am difficult to deal with I would like them to give the names of the people actually making those statements and real examples of my being difficult to do business with.
When BJ Beuno asked me gor permission to make my sliding shell I said he could as long as it was not similar to my C/S Transpo routine. I explained that my health was bad and I needed the income from that trick just to pay for the medication I must take every day.
I told him if he only had different handling he could publish it or make a DVD showing anything new with my gimmick. But he insisted on having my gimmick to sell. I offered to supply the gimmicks but he didn't want to buy from me. He didn't even ask what I would charge for the gimmicks. That is why I said no to him. he did not want me to make any profit at all from my gimmick even though he knew I have health problems.
It was only when I refused that they all decided to claim I didn't invent the gimmick at all. But I did invent and anyone who knows of all the tricks I manufactured over the years knows I only manufacture my own creations.
Once my latest health problem is resolved I intend to start making my gimmicks again since no one can even copy them properly. I do not sell to any magic dealers so I don't have to sell wholes sale at 50% to 60% off the retail price. That means I hope be selling my gimmicks for about $15.00 with printed instrustions that will include additional routines. For those of you who insist on DVD instructions I will have an optional DVD available for about $5.00.
I am disappointed that so few magicians remember me. I quit selling magic to magic dealers about 15 years ago because they were all making or selling copies of all of my tricks. Copying tricks doesn't sound like much of a crime but my financial losses to the machinists and magic dealers is in the 6 figure range.
I am very easy to deal with. I gave my lethal tender to Sterling Magic and many other visual coin tricks such as Washout. I gave Waltzing matilda to Tenyo. I gave the 5 books I wrote to Jim Klein. I gave tricks to anyone who needed new tricks to help them financially. Many of the people I gave tricks to were strangers. And after giving them the tricks I ordered and paid for 100 of each to give them working capital. I also wrote the instructions and had them printed for them free. I would relly like to know the names of the people claiming I am difficult to deal with.
Best wishes,
Steve
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Oct 28, 2007 11:27PM)
Steve, let us know when you're up and running. You have a guaranteed customer right here [and I'm sure I'm not alone].

All the best to you!
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 29, 2007 12:01AM)
I forwarded Steve's comemnts to Jonthan Bayme ( Theory 11 CEO ) and to Lee Asher.
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Oct 29, 2007 12:24AM)
I'll pick up some items from steve once he starts selling again
Message: Posted by: Thomas Wayne (Oct 29, 2007 01:55AM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-23 21:28, podcastrant wrote:
Hart,
[...]
Your asinine comment regarding my comment that the co-chair of ethics for the SAM came on here and said it was a rip-off, I guess was your attempt at sarcasm. It fell short.

Kenner doesn't really have that great a reputation (on this board at least) for ethics. Since he took an idea of Jonathan Townsend's added a few things (including an unpublished Latta move for the last vanish that he didn't ask permission to publish) and released it without permission.

In his original ThreeFly pamphlet he states that it had been a pet routine of his since 1986. I find this funny since all documentation from Jonathan says that he showed it to Kenner in 1987. How could it have been a pet routine of his a year before Jonathan showed it to him?

If you watch Kenner's history of ThreeFly on COINvention you'll see that he said it was some time after Jonathan showed it to him that he perfected his routine. So this would put his dating in the instructions off even more

We've done our research, now you do yours.
[/quote]


Hey, "podcastrant" (speaking of asinine) since you've now been shown to be WRONG on both points - Chris Kenner "stealing" from Townsend, and the relative dates you've claim to have "researched" - can we expect an open apology to Kenner any time soon?

Just because you're one of Jonathan's lap dogs doesn't mean you have to follow in his his footsteps. You've made your mistakes and been mislead by your own personal Svengali, but don't you think now's the time for you to try to be a man and atone for your sins?

We'll wait over here.

TW
Message: Posted by: jbayme (Oct 29, 2007 03:39AM)
Mr. Dusheck, et al,

After exhaustively speaking with everyone here at theory11, I have decided to completely suspend sales of Digital Dissolve until we fully resolve the issue with Mr. Dusheck. To keep everyone current with what's happening, at this time, we are still trying to resolve this delicate situation privately, respectfully, and professionally. As the CEO of theory11, I do take responsibility, and I am truly sorry.

Please know I've only had pure intent from the beginning. When the situation first came to our attention, we began additional research and I promptly had a handwritten letter sent to Mr. Dusheck approximately four weeks ago in hopes of resolving the matter directly. I have still not received any response to this letter, and thereafter followed up with numerous emails and unsuccessful attempts to reach Mr. Dusheck by phone.

Please understand that it was my intention (and still is) to reach out and resolve the matter directly, privately, and professionally with all parties involved before replying and discussing this on a public forum. It's important for us to make known theory11's position and situation regarding this matter so that a lot of false accusations, rumors, and hearsay are laid to rest.

I work every day to resolve this issue. Chris and I attempted to contact Mr. Dusheck yesterday afternoon with no success. Only after his last post was I made aware of his delicate health issues. This can certainly account for a lack of response. Despite everything, I still truly wish to speak with him directly to express my apologizes for all the mistakes made and to "make good" on the situation.

Again, please understand that it was my intent to resolve this matter privately before coming to the forums. On top of everything, trying to wrangle everyone on my team (artists and staff included) for a full discussion was quite an effort. It took longer than I expected, and I, like everyone else on our team - wanted this to be resolved weeks ago.

Believe me when I say I want to make everything better-than-right for Mr. Dusheck.

Mr. Dusheck, if you're reading this - I am willing to do anything it will take to make this right. If you will please give me five minutes of your time, you'll hear the sincerity in my voice.

Respectfully,

// jonathan.bayme
ceo / theory11
Message: Posted by: atigu (Oct 29, 2007 07:04AM)
About time this was pulled, just way too late for my taste though.
But by all means, good thing you guys over at T11 finally woke up.
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Oct 29, 2007 08:15AM)
Oh Thomas, how are those coin ladders coming?

[quote]
On 2007-10-26 20:45, Thomas Wayne wrote:

I’ve just shown that you’ve lied all along about Chris Kenner “stealing” your routine. Turns out you [b]taught[/b] it to him, and one thing we all know is THAT isn’t “stealing”.
[/quote]

So this would mean that Lassen did nothing wrong to Kohler. Are you ready to atone for yours?

Right now it's Bob's word against Jonathan's. Bob says 84 and Jonathan says 87. Although I recanted after Bob's reply, I'm now waiting to see more evidence.

[quote]
On 2007-10-26 23:44, Thomas Wayne wrote:
(PS: As for [i]you[/i], “podcastrant”, I was finished discussing anything with you a long time ago.)
[/quote]

I see your word is as good as mine.

Back on topic....Thanks Jonathan Bayme, this means a lot to a lot of coin workers on here. I think this step speaks volumes.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 29, 2007 10:50AM)
Like I said before, my comments on Steve D. were hearsay from a few anonymous folks. Notice the grapevine comment boys? That means hearsay. I didn't speak it as "fact". Obviously most of you have had a different experience with him, but I guess that is just hearsay to me as well...
Message: Posted by: Illusion & Beyond (Oct 29, 2007 11:43AM)
I have been watching this thread since the begining and wish something had been done sooner. Theory 11 waited till they sold out( or at least close to) of DD and then suspended the sales. I had been watching the counter on their site because this was one trick I wanted but could not bring myself to buy it due to the controversy around it. I was hoping everything would get worked out and I wouldn't feel like a crook buying this. I guess it will be available after all with the right creditor. Hope everything works out Steve.
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Oct 29, 2007 11:45AM)
Not everyone has forgotten you steve =) I really hope to see you make some things again.

I'm really happy to see a real response on this. way to go.

I got a lot of flak from people for "whining" but as you can see these things really effect real people's lives.
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Oct 29, 2007 12:55PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-29 12:43, Illusion & Beyond wrote:
I have been watching this thread since the begining and wish something had been done sooner. Theory 11 waited till they sold out( or at least close to) of DD and then suspended the sales. I had been watching the counter on their site because this was one trick I wanted but could not bring myself to buy it due to the controversy around it. I was hoping everything would get worked out and I wouldn't feel like a crook buying this. I guess it will be available after all with the right creditor. Hope everything works out Steve.
[/quote]

interesting huh. if I were a betting man, id bet that jamie would not make them any more gaffs. so now its "pulled"
Message: Posted by: W:H (Oct 29, 2007 01:06PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-29 13:55, Joshua Barrett wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-10-29 12:43, Illusion & Beyond wrote:
I have been watching this thread since the begining and wish something had been done sooner. Theory 11 waited till they sold out( or at least close to) of DD and then suspended the sales. I had been watching the counter on their site because this was one trick I wanted but could not bring myself to buy it due to the controversy around it. I was hoping everything would get worked out and I wouldn't feel like a crook buying this. I guess it will be available after all with the right creditor. Hope everything works out Steve.
[/quote]

interesting huh. if I were a betting man, id bet that jamie would not make them any more gaffs. so now its "pulled"
[/quote]


Hey guys:

I'll be happy to take your bet! :) We are not even close to out of stock on these items, and Jamie is still willing to make the gaffs. Jamie has, in writing, permission from Dusheck to do so. We suspended sales of the item because it was the right thing to do - and we are still attempting to reach Mr. Dusheck.

Wayne Houchin
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Oct 29, 2007 01:08PM)
Good thing I'm not a betting man perhaps =D
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Oct 29, 2007 01:13PM)
Thanks Wayne, it means a lot.
Message: Posted by: W:H (Oct 29, 2007 01:17PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-29 14:08, Joshua Barrett wrote:
Good thing I'm not a betting man perhaps =D
[/quote]

:) Josh - I hope that you don't think that anybody at T11 is put off by your vigilence with this matter (and that goes for everyone). All of us hope that you would be as watchful with us if we ever found ourselves in a tough spot. Thank you for that. Again, this is a matter that we have taken very seriously from the start & are commited to making things "better than right." Talk to you soon.

Wayne Houchin

P.S. We admire & congratulate all who expressed their feelings during this delicate situation. Without passionate people like you, artists like Steve Dushek & the rest of us would never have a fighting chance.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 29, 2007 01:41PM)
Wayne,
Thanks for the post and yes, you may count on me to go to bat for you or other creators with no history of rip offs if something like this ever happens with one of your effects!
Mick
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 29, 2007 02:17PM)
I applaud Theory 11 folks for coming on here and I look forwad to a resolution on this matter.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Oct 29, 2007 02:35PM)
I knew they would come through...

Thank you Theory 11 for doing the right thing...
Message: Posted by: Review King (Oct 29, 2007 02:37PM)
[quote]
On 2007-10-29 15:35, Hart Keene wrote:
I knew they would come through...

Thank you Theory 11 for doing the right thing...
[/quote]

Agreed. And now if Mr. Duschek concurs with Jonatahn Bayme's post we'll be that much closer to resolving this issue.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Oct 29, 2007 02:39PM)
So far it's lip service IMO and actions WILL speak much louder!
Mick
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Oct 29, 2007 02:47PM)
Well on their website it says the effect is "temporarily unavailable". From Steve's posts on the Café and what people have said he has went through with theft in the past (I.e. Lethal Tender), I don't see him giving the go ahead.

It will be interesting to see what happens if Steve is not willing to play ball.
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Oct 30, 2007 03:48PM)
It's great to see such fruit come from this mighty tree. I remember when it was first planted, think they eventually cut that part of this tree down and did away with it when some lunatics went off on various tangents trying to play Perry Mason with everything all at once. But be that as it may, it's good to see that Steve Dusheck is being given the respect due him and his marvelous works.

That's what all of this was about from the very beginning, to help a wonderful guy out that has helped out and provided so much for so many for so long. I'm glad to call him a friend, and glad that some bullies aimed at taking him off in a back alley were stopped, charged with the crime and found guilty because they were. And believe it, there weren't any mistakes made here or harmless oversights, and apologies only rendered because the culprits were caught in the act.

Personally, I believed Steve without reservation from the very beginning on all of this and his truth has never wavered on the matter. Those who thought otherwise and pleaded that way here need to check the balance on their own moral compasses as to what's good and not-so-good, especially when speaking of what the word "honorable" is all about, sans any particular friendships, loyalism or admirations.

Anyway, to Josh and many here, I think we all did a wonderful job right from the start in hunting this bear, and then in bringing the supposedly mighty mountain back down to Mohammed. Now that's real magic. ;) "Bueno" job! :)
Message: Posted by: evolve629 (Nov 1, 2007 10:30PM)
Perhaps T11 ran out of DD?
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 1, 2007 10:39PM)
Or perhaps they've run out of BS!
Message: Posted by: viris (Nov 5, 2007 06:11AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-01 23:30, evolve629 wrote:
Perhaps T11 ran out of DD?
[/quote]
That's OK. I just recieved Steve Dusheck's 1982 lecture DVD which has this effect on it. He tells you how to make the gimmick and for 10 bucks you can't go wrong, that's with shipping. You get that effect (copper, silver trans.) which is worth more then the video and numerous other routines that are priceless. I can't recommend this DVD enough. I hope this helps everyone.
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 5, 2007 07:40AM)
Anyone hear any update on this?
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 5, 2007 04:46PM)
I haven't heard or seen anything new other than some pot shots at Josh on the T11 site. I sent one of them a PM giving him a brief history lesson and a suggestion of being loyal to the creators but never got a response.
Might be time to turn up the heat again aye?!?!?
Mick
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Nov 5, 2007 08:56PM)
Ummmmmm, no
Message: Posted by: Crimson-Death (Nov 6, 2007 03:59AM)
Aye, turn up the heat again, it's getting cold and stale again.


[quote]
On 2007-11-05 07:11, viris wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-01 23:30, evolve629 wrote:
Perhaps T11 ran out of DD?
[/quote]
That's OK. I just recieved Steve Dusheck's 1982 lecture DVD which has this effect on it. He tells you how to make the gimmick and for 10 bucks you can't go wrong, that's with shipping. You get that effect (copper, silver trans.) which is worth more then the video and numerous other routines that are priceless. I can't recommend this DVD enough. I hope this helps everyone.
[/quote]

Is Mr. Dusheck well enough again to ship out his DVDs? If so, I need to contact him and get this.
Message: Posted by: viris (Nov 6, 2007 04:35AM)
I don't know if he is well or not but I recieved my DVD in 4 days after I mailed my money. I don't know who I was e-mailing back and forth but it seemed like it was his wife. Anyway they were very professional. I still think it is {{WAY}} under priced.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 6, 2007 07:36AM)
Any word on that back of the hand snap change where you can show your hand right after? Is it taught on the DVD? Also heard there's a change where Lee Asher just picks up the coin, it changes, the coin is then tabled as examinable. Is that taught too?
Message: Posted by: Steve Dusheck (Nov 9, 2007 09:01AM)
Jon,
Are you saying it's okay for people to copy my trick as long as they add a new move to the trick? Having a magnet attached to your wrist with a band aid is a very old idea from the 1960s and it is not practical for working magicians.
The routine on my DVD works in the real world under all working conditions. I spend a lot of time eliminating moves from my routine and they are cluttering it up with additional moves and additional gimmicks and angle problems that are of no use to working magicians. They are even showing moves described in my instructions for the Slippery Sam Combination Coins.
If you already have one of my gimmicks you know that adding teflon tape degrades the gimmick. You also know how much better my gimmick is. When my health improves it will be available again.
By the way, the CEO claims he spent a whole day calling me and sent many E-mails that I did not answer. That is not true. It was just lip service as most of you surmised.
He may be the CEO but he has no control on resolving the issue that they copied my trick without my permission. He is not really the man in charge so even if he really did send me an E-mail his words would onlys be words.
My wife is filling my DVD orders for me.
Steve
Message: Posted by: jimbowmanjr (Nov 9, 2007 09:14AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-09 10:01, Steve Dusheck wrote:
Jon,
Are you saying it's okay for people to copy my trick as long as they add a new move to the trick? Having a magnet attached to your wrist with a band aid is a very old idea from the 1960s and it is not practical for working magicians.
The routine on my DVD works in the real world under all working conditions. I spend a lot of time eliminating moves from my routine and they are cluttering it up with additional moves and additional gimmicks and angle problems that are of no use to working magicians. They are even showing moves described in my instructions for the Slippery Sam Combination Coins.
If you already have one of my gimmicks you know that adding teflon tape degrades the gimmick. You also know how much better my gimmick is. When my health improves it will be available again.
By the way, the CEO claims he spent a whole day calling me and sent many E-mails that I did not answer. That is not true. It was just lip service as most of you surmised.
He may be the CEO but he has no control on resolving the issue that they copied my trick without my permission. He is not really the man in charge so even if he really did send me an E-mail his words would onlys be words.
My wife is filling my DVD orders for me.
Steve
[/quote]

Steve,

Thanks for taking the time to stop by with everything you have going on. It is great news to hear that you are going to be offering YOUR gimmick again in the future. I wish you the best and a speedy recovery.

Cheers,

Jim
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 9, 2007 09:28AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-09 10:01, Steve Dusheck wrote:
Jon,
Are you saying it's okay for people to copy my trick as long as they add a new move to the trick? ...Steve [/quote]

OUCH. That's not the sentiment I wished to communicate or even imply.

I used that particular item ( the snap coin change ), shown in the demo video, to ask if the product is accurately represented - Rhetorically to ask about the basic integrity of those involved in the project and who stand by it.

My opinions about it being unkind, disrespectful and IMHO unethical to go around showing, publishing or selling other people's ideas or works even under the pretense of offering a minor change to handling, gaff, hand position etc. are all over the café and have drawn the ire of many.

best wishes to you and yours,

Jon
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 9, 2007 10:10AM)
Steve thanks for posting. I hoped for the best, but feared the worst.
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 9, 2007 11:08AM)
Ahh some more truth comes out and more people look like liars. thank you for keeping light on this matter
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 9, 2007 11:45AM)
I posted on their board, we'll see if they answer.

What's the next step? They were caught, pulled the effect and then lied about trying to resolve the issue. For me, they're worse off than they began.

Steve's assertion that Bayme is CEO in name only is very telling. How do we find out who has the power and makes the decisions for them?
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 9, 2007 11:51AM)
Another reason why people continue to get away with it:

[quote]
Sleight_of_Hand post:
all I can say is LOL to josh barette, you talk too much
[/quote]

taking into account that I had not posted on that thread in weeks I can only guess that's into response from the product being pulling and some 13 year old not being able to buy it.

in response to pod, ill do some digging to see if I can find any public information on the company.
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 9, 2007 12:09PM)
What concerns me, is are the magicians involved just paid contractors or do they have say in what goes on? It would seem at this point in Chris' career that he would have a stake in anything that he was involved with.

The only reason I say this is because Jonathan Bayme said in his post that Chris and he (Grammar?) were trying to reach Dusheck (which has proven not to be the case) and resolve the issue. If Chris is just a hired hand, why would he be involved in those talks?
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 9, 2007 12:21PM)
I have no idea abotu chris but when there were some issues with the pre launch hype, one of the artists told me he was contractual obligated not to spill the beans even to help us sort out a issue. that would tell me that the artists are not in any position of power but merely paid to be part of the thing
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 9, 2007 01:17PM)
I joined the T11 forum a week or so ago and have posted a few times but had no response of any importance.
I'd say keep a flame lit and someone will have to address it at some point!
I've known about the BS claimed by Bayme for a couple weeks but did not have permission from SD to put it out in public. I'm glad Steve popped in!
Mick
Message: Posted by: jbayme (Nov 9, 2007 02:33PM)
Steve,

If you did not receive our mail correspondences, please, please let me know and I will resend our messages with the date of our previous mailing. I have spent hours upon hours on the phone over the past few weeks in attempt to resolve things directly and amicably. At each attempt, I was told through mutual acquaintances that you were unable to speak with us at this time, and that your health is in delicate state. This is understood, so we waited, and I suspended sale of the product in the meantime. If there's another CEO here, I sure don't know about him.

Just a few days ago, mutual friends spoke with you on our behalf, and we were told that your health was currently in delicate state and understandably of primary importance above all else. After hearing this, we have been consciously waiting to initiate contact with you again from our side until after your health condition was resolved. Nothing matters more than your health. This is magic-- that is life, and we understand this.

As stated, I have suspended all sale of the product on the site and removed all reference to it until we can chat and resolve things 101%. I have posted our position and thoughts on the forums this past week, and I stand by every word spoken. I just spoke with Marc Desouza a few moments ago by phone as well to convey our sentiments and-- above all else-- well wishes towards your health.

All we wish to do is to speak with you and express our sincere desire to resolve all things amicably and directly and respectfully and professionally. I understand that your health must take the unrivaled priority. We do wish to resolve things when you are back to 100%, and as I am unsure of which email address we have on file for you is correct, I have just private messaged you my direct contact information for further discussion.

Sincerely,

// jonathan.bayme
ceo / theory11
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 9, 2007 02:42PM)
I pm'ed the email jon, steve does not come to the Café much sp you might not get a response
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 9, 2007 02:55PM)
What are you writing about Joshua?
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 9, 2007 03:02PM)
The other jon ;) he said he was not sure if he had the right email so I sent him the right email
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 9, 2007 05:26PM)
Steve's e mail address is no secret, it's on his web site!
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Nov 9, 2007 09:44PM)
Sounds like almost everyone on this board has been in touch with Steve except Mr. Bayme. So what's going on?

Seriously T11 people, take this as a freebie from someone VERY involved and experienced in PR... YOU ARE !@#$%^& THIS UP.
Message: Posted by: Crimson-Death (Nov 10, 2007 06:34AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-09 18:26, MickeyPainless wrote:
Steve's e mail address is no secret, it's on his web site!
[/quote]

Heck, the email address is even right here, on his Magic Café profile!
Man, I love this place, knowledge for all who seek.
Message: Posted by: tbaronio (Nov 10, 2007 08:37AM)
First, let me say that I don’t get to visit the Café as often as I would like. It wasn’t until this past week that I learned of this topic being discussed in great detail. With that said, I would like to say that Steve Dusheck is one of the most honest and respected individuals I have known in the magic community for quite sometime. He has helped me in so many ways with my career that I can’t thank him enough. I am happy and very proud to call him my best friend.
We try to keep in touch either by visiting with one another or by phone at least once a week. These past few weeks, I myself have had a very hard time getting in touch with him due to the fact that he was either resting or was not home due to the fact that he was in and out of the hospital going through a series of tests. It wasn’t until this past Wed. that I was able to talk with him for a long period of time.
So be patient, he is taking care of his health first.

Tony
Message: Posted by: DP the Great (Nov 10, 2007 10:00AM)
This is incredible. The whole enchilada. I have been so busy studying here in UofM, but I did get to see DD a few weeks ago and was fairly impressed. I just read this entire post and was appalled. I am so glad I didn't end up purchasing it a few eeks ago. I hate rip offs, and I wish this would be settled in a professional manner and not by silence. I am totally interested in buying Steve's effect. May this situation not be another stain in the magic community. -DP
Message: Posted by: wpt1031 (Nov 10, 2007 11:44AM)
I bought this effect weeks ago before the whole controversy. I must say I'm quite sadden by the mess. Hopefully JB can right the wrongs his company has made.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 10, 2007 02:13PM)
I wonder whatever happened to ol' BJ Bueno? Once the FACTS started rolling in he disappeared!
Message: Posted by: Roy McIlwee (Nov 10, 2007 02:45PM)
Steve Dusheck is one of the kindest, most generous people I have ever met. He is considered a pure genius of magic by most that know him. Show Steve a trick and he'll show you 6 or 7 ways to improve it. And then about a month later he'll he'll show you 6 more. It would be very difficult to find a nicer, more generous person than Steve. Roy McIlwee.
Message: Posted by: Micheal Leath (Nov 10, 2007 03:40PM)
It seems the facts are perfectly clear. Theory11 never had permission to sell Steve's routine. If Mr. Bayme was so concerned with doing the right thing, it would not have taken so long to stop selling the product. He would have never even started to sell it.
Message: Posted by: Review King (Nov 10, 2007 06:01PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-10 15:13, MickeyPainless wrote:
I wonder whatever happened to ol' BJ Bueno? Once the FACTS started rolling in he disappeared!
[/quote]

Funny how that happens!
Message: Posted by: evolve629 (Nov 10, 2007 09:17PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-10 19:01, Christopher Kavanagh wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-10 15:13, MickeyPainless wrote:
I wonder whatever happened to ol' BJ Bueno? Once the FACTS started rolling in he disappeared!
[/quote]

Funny how that happens!
[/quote]
After all, it's magic! Things just materialized and dematerialized..
Message: Posted by: joseph (Nov 11, 2007 06:05AM)
Or dissolved... :) ..
Message: Posted by: Gary Yin (Nov 11, 2007 09:56AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-10 16:40, Micheal Leath wrote:
It seems the facts are perfectly clear. Theory11 never had permission to sell Steve's routine. If Mr. Bayme was so concerned with doing the right thing, it would not have taken so long to stop selling the product. He would have never even started to sell it.
[/quote]

Every product counts.
Message: Posted by: MICKEY SILVER (Nov 11, 2007 02:39PM)
Hello Everyone, I'm so sorry there has to be a thread like this on the Café !!!

I am one of the very few Magicians who get's "ALL THE NEW TRICKS" Steve invents, as "OUR ETHICS" are extremely similar regarding Magic. I just have to say , If you think his 1982 DVD is great you would not "BELIEVE YOUR EYES" seeing these new tricks. I have been trying to encourage Steve to put them out and even offered to put them out myself ,"CREDITING" Steve in the fullest....."BUT HE WILL NOT " he told me he knows machinists will copy them and the magic shops will sell the copies. I find this to be a great loss to the Magic World.

3 years ago Steve took an interest in the "COIN MAGIC I PERFORM" as I took an interest in the "COIN MAGIC HE CREATED AND STILL CREATES". We have become the very best of friends over the years.

NOT ONLY ! is Steve Dusheck my Friend, he is the nicest and "MOST ETHICAL" person in Magic that I know.

MICKEY SILVER
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 11, 2007 03:08PM)
Nice to see you pop in Mickey! Steve speaks highly of you as well and he told me that you 2 had done some stuff that will absolutely fry folks! Look forward to seeing it someday!
All the best,
Mick (The other)
Message: Posted by: Evilstalkerhorne (Nov 13, 2007 12:50AM)
With so many tricks out there how do you know when you are in copywrite violation until you get called on it? It is not like people patent string or copywright dollar bills or anything. I have several gimmicks I am thinking about putting out or releasing PDF files for but I want to make sure I am not gonna get sued first and to give credit (if needed) to the originator of the trick.

ie. I have the classic pen through the dollar. Everyone should have an idea how I do not rip it. I use a regular pen and a modified dollar. I recently got burned when upon close examination one of the people I did the trick for called me out seeing the seal. I recently made a modification to this and WOW! Way better!!!!! No visible hole, tear, rip, wrinkle or anything else. To my knowlege (I showed this to someone else who remembers names WAY better than I do and has practiced for years - he liked it Very much) no one has done it this way yet. You can even pass it out and only 2 people saw the improvement. I have handed it out about 10-15 times. Pretty good odds I think. I'm sure I can't legally sell US currency that is modified. I am making a video though that shares how to do this yourself, but before I release it if anyone knows if I should give credit etc to let me know now so I can do so.
I have other things like how to make your own flash cotton igniters, pullers for under your sleeves, etc. etc. and have been using my gimmicks for a bit now insted of the bought ones I origionally purchased (and got hosed on) because frankly the ones I made are more effective (and 1000 times cheaper). Suggestions would be great if someone could direct me to a place where I can check and see if my stuff is sellible legally. I am sure that the people that put this Digital Dissolve out did not mean to step on anyones toes. They probably thought their version was unique in some way. It is currently off their site and has only been out for a very short while. Accidents happen sometimes. Thanks!
Message: Posted by: Curtis Kam (Nov 13, 2007 02:44AM)
Evil, check out the "Right or Wrong" section of the Café--your questions have been answered there.
Message: Posted by: viris (Nov 13, 2007 03:31AM)
Odviously Evilstalkerhorne didn't read the whole topic, cause if he did he would have known the real story and the time line.
Message: Posted by: Crimson-Death (Nov 13, 2007 08:35AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-13 01:50, Evilstalkerhorne wrote:
...I am sure that the people that put this Digital Dissolve out did not mean to step on anyones toes. They probably thought their version was unique in some way. It is currently off their site and has only been out for a very short while. Accidents happen sometimes. Thanks!
[/quote]

If we are to believe Mr. Dusheck, and why should we not, about being approached by Bueno before the release of this product, then yes, the Digital Dissolve version very much stepped on someone's toes not by accident. Don't think there was much unique to be found in the trick either.
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 13, 2007 09:28AM)
Hehe, if you would read this and other threads you would realize that t11 has used up any benefit of the doubt that they will ever get
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 13, 2007 04:57PM)
I'll tell you all what is funny....

None of us KNOW anything for sure!

This has become a "he said she said" fiasco. Everything "Café experts" know is purely hearsay.

Everyone is pointing fingers. I don't know who to believe anymore...
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 13, 2007 05:12PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-13 17:57, Hart Keene wrote:...I don't know who to believe anymore...
[/quote]

Kindly read what Steve Dusheck himself has said about the matter.


[quote]I did not give BJ Bueno permission to put out his version of my trick. I have given permission to all the other machinists who asked for it. I did give Jamie Schoolcraft permission to make my gimmick. I feel very sad that he is making the trick.[/quote]

Here is the entire post so you have it in context:


[quote]
On 2007-09-11 12:52, Steve Dusheck wrote:

It seems the people claiming I did not create the sliding gimmick and the routine are those involved with making money from my idea.

My routine and gimmick were out long before anyone else thought to use it. Hank Lee advertised my trick before it was ever published by Fulve's. Does that mean Fulve's copyied my idea? I didn't care one way or another.

Jon Townsend stated that Slippery Sam ( a magnetic version of my C/S Transpo)was put out in 1976. He is wrong. The copyright on the Gibson instructions is 1971. Townsend told me Bob Elliot bought one and demonstrated it at Tannen's magic shop and telling everyone how great it was. Later when he wrote his routine for Fulve's no mention was made of my trick or Eddie Gibson.

When I fooled Don Alan with my C/S Transpo he asked me to do it for Pressly Guitar. I did and fooled him too. It was after my showing him how it worked that he started making his half dollar version but using my routine.

These people claim Guitar sold his gimmick before I made mine but they offer no proof. Only the word of their friends. But my word is not good enough. One of my specialties was inventing coin tricks. I put out a lot of them. I only manufactured tricks I created. The dealers ads will show that. There is no proof that Guitar invented any magic tricks except the stories he told.

I did not give BJ Bueno permission to put out his version of my trick. I have given permission to all the other machinists who asked for it. I did give Jamie Schoolcraft permission to make my gimmick. I feel very sad that he is making the trick.

If there are any machinists reading this who would like to manufacture my C/S Tranpo with my full permission please contact me at my website.
[/quote]
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 13, 2007 06:02PM)
Here's Bueno's quotes from the T11 forums, for those that missed them the first time.

"Hi Guys I originally started playing with what is now Digital Dissolve after I acquired the “Gimmick” that the effect uses now.
This crafted gimmick that got me playing with this was created by a Presley Guitar from Texas and predates Steve’s. Presley told me the idea predates him by many years and he mentioned crafting coins of this nature for J.B Bobo. Also Palbearers Review mentions the gaff. I have tried to chase down the history of this gimmick. Presley Guitar mentioned to me that he started creating many coins that were variations of this gaff; the one used is only one idea.

From the routines perspective it was developed by trying to combine Bobo's handling of copper silver transpo and David Roth. After many trials with audiences the method simplified to what is shown today, even thought I still continue to play with many ways of creating this effect.

It has not been my intention to rerelease as I believed this to be something unique and the approach I took on the effect differs. I hope this helps in the discussion. And again sorry if you feel you got something you already knew."

"
From a routine perspective, DD is completely different, and the effect to the your audience is not even close to C/S Transpo. I am of course not saying I don't like Steve's effect, but DD and C/S are not the same. C/S Transpo is much closer to the marketed effect "Scotch and Soda."

Steve Dusheck is not mentioned in the printed record for creation of the gaff, but regardless, our intention was to give credit to all of those necessary in preparation of the Digital Dissolve DVD. If the claim is that Fulves did not credit him, why was that not changed later on in the record? How am I responsible for that? I can only credit what the printed record acknowledges, and I am sure a simple letter could have done the trick. Who invented the gaff? That is the only credit that I believe is in question.

Here are what three very well known people give as credit to this gimmick:

- Karl Fulves says the gimmick has been around a long time, and is much older than he is.
- Presly Guitar, although came up with the gimmick on his own, later found out and acknowledged that the gimmick was also much older than he.
- Steve Dusheck says that he is the originator of this gimmick.

So the question here is whose gaff is it, and why was this not addressed and resolved decades ago? As anyone who has seen the Digital Dissolve DVD will notice, I have done my due diligence and credit all of those who have touched the gaff. As you know, it would have been much less expensive for us to create this gimmick ourselves, but it was very important to us for Jamie Schoolcraft to make the gimmicks for this effect-- as he is the only person in the world with permission from Steve Dusheck to create the coins. DD is not the same as C/S Transpo, and if you would like to try performing both of routines and show them around, you will notice the difference quickly.

I want to clear this up because I do believe people are getting a great effect that is different and valuable."

And here's Bueno called on his misinformation by the co-chair of Ethics for the Society of American Magicians:

"Hi All,

First, to JTW, I do not claim any authority on anything in magic, however, I know the history on this matter. Please pay attention to what you are about to read, because I do not intend to post on this issue again. You will not hear any rebuttal to these facts from Fulves, Elliott or Guitar, because to do so would be a lie. Steve Dusheck created the sliding shell in the mid-60's. He sold one of the first ones to J.G. Thompson. He gave Eddie Gibson of England the right to manufacture and market the idea with Steve's Slippery Sam routine in 1970. Gibson marketed it and the copyright date on the instructions is 1971. Bob Elliott bought a set and worked out his routine. Karl Fulves asked for permission to publish it, which he did in Pallbearer's Review. BTW, for BJ's information, that magazine did not exist in the 50's. Fulves claimed that the idea for the sliding shell was old, but when challenged on that fact, he later recanted and admitted that Dusheck created it.

Steve showed his routine to Don Alan. Pressley Guitar was there and freaked out over it. He bugged Steve for it and Steve not only showed him the gaff but explained exactly how to make it.

B.J. Bueno spoke to Steve Dusheck several years ago and wanted his permission to market his routine. Steve offered to sell him the gaffs wholesale "As long as he was not marketing it as a Copper/Silver Transposition". B.J. could not do that. He went to Todd Lassen to get the gaffs made, but Lassen did not have Steve's permission to do that. Jamie Schoolcraft asked Steve for permission to make the gaffs for customers. Steve gave him permission on the assumtion that it would be for guys who wanted a special version of the gaff. I don't believe that T11 told Jamie what they wanted the gaffs for, but I cannot attest to that fact for certain. All I know is that I was called by a mutual friend who said that "Jamie is sick over this and wants to talk to Steve to make things right".

I spoke to Steve Duscheck the other evening and he is sick over this whole fiasco. I feel the same way. I find it very distressing that several talented young men who I call friends would stoop to this level of thievery. I have had the pleasure of calling Steve Dusheck my friend for many years. He has helped me over the years in so many ways, not the least of which creating effects specifically for my repertoire. I consider him one of the five most creative men, if not in the entire history of magic, at least in the last 100 years. It is a pity that repeated activities such as this have caused him to retreat from magic. Everyone in our art will suffer for that, instead of being able to enjoy so many more fruits of his labors.

Marc DeSouza"

You notice that no one from T11 has disputed DeSouza's take on the matter, which was posted a couple of months ago. It's funny how some people still need convincing.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 13, 2007 06:16PM)
Jonathan, I have read the posts. You have to remember that I don't personally know Steve D. I am sure he is an honest man, from what I have heard I don't doubt that. But there is still so much he said she said going on that I am not going to "join" the burning of Bueno, or theory 11 for that matter.

Just so I can understand this better...Did Steve D. ask Schoolcraft what he was making all the gimmicks for? Why isn't there more blame on the part of Schoolcraft? Did he know what the gimmicks were for or was he a "mindless worker" doing what he was told?
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 13, 2007 06:21PM)
Hey Chad, what happened to "podcastrant"?
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 13, 2007 06:25PM)
Here's the cliff notes for those that can't read more than a paragraph. gbooze says my four facts are likened to a tabloid. Ok let's see.

1. It's marketed as his effect.

Hopefully we all agree on this.

2. He made a few posts on here (the thread got deleted) and on the T11 boards discredited Steve Dusheck's contribution.

Let's see what BJ Bueno said:
[quote]This crafted gimmick that got me playing with this was created by a Presley Guitar from Texas and predates Steve’s. [/quote]

[quote]From a routine perspective, DD is completely different, and the effect to the your audience is not even close to C/S Transpo. I am of course not saying I don't like Steve's effect, but DD and C/S are not the same. C/S Transpo is much closer to the marketed effect "Scotch and Soda." [/quote]

And what does the guy whose job it is to weigh in on these things say:

[quote]The gimmick is most certainly Steve's. I have known him a long time, and he is one of the most original thinkers in magic, as well as one of the most generous guys. He developed the gimmick in the late '60s and predated Fulves and Guitar.[/quote]]

3. He put words in Pressley Guitar's mouth, which from the several friends of Guitar's who see him on a weekly basis say is completely false.

[quote]This crafted gimmick that got me playing with this was created by a Presley Guitar from Texas and predates Steve’s. Presley told me the idea predates him by many years and he mentioned crafting coins of this nature for J.B Bobo.[/quote]

I can only say that several people, who I verified were friends with Pressley, said the above comments were false.

4. He went to Dusheck for permission to release it, Dusheck said no and he did it anyway. He knew what he was doing.

What does the co-chair say?
[quote]B.J. Bueno spoke to Steve Dusheck several years ago and wanted his permission to market his routine. Steve offered to sell him the gaffs wholesale "As long as he was not marketing it as a Copper/Silver Transposition". B.J. could not do that.[/quote]

If you still dismiss my 4 points as tabloid, we'll have to agree to disagree.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 13, 2007 06:29PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-13 19:06, Chad Barnard wrote:
So you're calling the co-chair of ethics of the Society of American Magicians a liar?


[/quote]


He wouldnt dare! He cares about his life too much. Its just the "booze" talking, please don't turn him in Chad! lol
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Nov 13, 2007 07:00PM)
Mickey painless should be chiming in here any second! :)
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 13, 2007 07:04PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-13 19:53, gbooze wrote:
Again, that is based on a few peoples' take on how they remembered history, not written documentation, and for all practical purposes...hearsay. Nothing more.

Sorry to say, SD should have documented years ago if he wanted to keep control of this..at least then we can look back and say..look, SD states here in 1974 that he invented the slippery sam gimmick and no one argued with him at that time. And if anyone had argued, it would have been much easier to go back further in time from that point...not 30 years later.
[/quote]

Good point...
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 13, 2007 07:06PM)
...
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 13, 2007 07:11PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-13 20:06, Chad Barnard wrote:
Really? So all of what we regard as recorded history is hearsay? Technically yes, but I hope you're not suggesting this.

So what are you theories on the causes for the fall of the Roman empire, because obviously it happened too long ago for people to make sense of.
[/quote]

Dude, all we are saying is that before burning good names in our art we should remember that this stuff is hearsay. None of the "facts" you spew can be be proven. Its easy to be an armchair quarterback when your reputation isn't on the line in the big "game"...Know what I mean Chad?

You are really involved in this thing Chad, but the outcome has absolutely no bearing on your name, your career, or your business. Would you agree?
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 13, 2007 07:13PM)
Again, I didn't spew my facts, I quoted those involved and/or those whose job it is to be involved.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 13, 2007 07:21PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-13 20:13, Chad Barnard wrote:
Again, I didn't spew my facts, I quoted those involved and/or those whose job it is to be involved.
[/quote]

Right, but its obvious which "side" you are on. I was just pointing out that you are very involved in this but the outcome has no bearing on you, unlike Theory 11 and its affiliates. Just be carefull because I know for a FACT that your facts are hearsay because you are not directly involved. Get it?
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 13, 2007 07:29PM)
As much as we'd like our friends to be "right" or our idols/icons/heroes to be well intended and giving, sometimes the facts don't match up with what we want to believe.

On the blame game... nobody going to blame these supposed "friends" for permitting their heroes/icons/buddies to get involved in an awkward situation even though it was almost certain to hurt someone else's feelings?

May your true friends help keep you from harming others, even hurting feelings.
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 13, 2007 08:28PM)
Of course, what I'm saying, by definition, is hearsay. I can prove nothing I've said above. How about this, can we assume that it's a fact that the above quotes were written by those they are attributed to?

If so, then it's up to the individual, who they trust more. Hopefully this ends our discussion of semantics.
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 13, 2007 09:07PM)
Whats not heresay is the fact that BJ asked steve for his permission. he was denied. he then did it anyway. if it was not steves creatation why did he ask him.
Message: Posted by: viris (Nov 14, 2007 03:10AM)
I think, and this is heresay also, but what I "THINK" is B.J. asked S.D. if he could uses the gimmicks AFTER J.S. made the gimmicks and when S.D. said no they went to plan B. That's my thoughts. I think B.J., J.S. and T11 are all tarnished. And the people that bought DD should at the least buy S.D. 82 DVD lecture and get a proven routine with the coins. And a bunch more.
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Nov 14, 2007 09:39AM)
And regarding the meeting in Kenner's house to decide on a name even after Dusheck had told them "NO" (on basis of his health and buying medication no less) about offering a c/s transpo using his gaff. So they got their answere but just didn't get the one they wanted, and so seemingly sought to proceed no matter what. Isn't that what it all looks like?

What's bad here is that these guys could have included the original Dusheck item as part of their product with gaff, and then sold the combined original with Bueno's routines as a truly historic and honorable and wonderful item...but they seemingly decided to simply bogart an old man and thought no one would care or do anything about it. I guess by magic, happily it didn't happen quite that way. And with all of what has occurred here, pretty much nothing has been done to ressurect the situation. Shouldn't Steve deserve something better than the okie-doke and an "ooops" from these guys?

And oh yeah, all involved are involved. Can't see how Kenner, Asher, Jamie, etc. all missed this at Steve's expense and pain. Sad. :/
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 14, 2007 10:01AM)
I've sent a pm and email to Lee hopefully he'll come on here and respond.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 11:05AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 10:39, Mb217 wrote:

What's bad here is that these guys could have included the original Dusheck item as part of their product with gaff, and then sold the combined original with Bueno's routines as a truly historic and honorable and wonderful item...but they seemingly decided to simply bogart an old man and thought no one would care or do anything about it.

And oh yeah, all involved are involved. Can't see how Kenner, Asher, Jamie, etc. all missed this at Steve's expense and pain. Sad. :/
[/quote]

This is what I'm talking about! Dude, you are making them sound like these evil corporate big wigs who are out to steel others work. You have no evidence that this was their INTENTION. Notice the word "seemingly". Both paragraphs I quoted above have absolutely no facts, just assumptions.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 11:19AM)
So lets just say that they they are guilty as charged. Besides a public beating, which most of you think they deserve... What do you all think should happen? Should they suspend sales(which they already did)? Publically apologize to Steve D.(which they did?)? Pay him some royalties? Send us all a copy of TEEN MAGAZINE so we can read some more he said she said bs? What?
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 14, 2007 11:21AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 12:05, Hart Keene wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 10:39, Mb217 wrote:

What's bad here is that these guys could have included the original Dusheck item as part of their product with gaff, and then sold the combined original with Bueno's routines as a truly historic and honorable and wonderful item...but they seemingly decided to simply bogart an old man and thought no one would care or do anything about it.

And oh yeah, all involved are involved. Can't see how Kenner, Asher, Jamie, etc. all missed this at Steve's expense and pain. Sad. :/
[/quote]

This is what I'm talking about! Dude, you are making them sound like these evil corporate big wigs who are out to steel others work. You have no evidence that this was their INTENTION. Notice the word "seemingly". Both paragraphs I quoted above have absolutely no facts, just assumptions.
[/quote]

Hart I understand what you are saying, but its even been unclear if they really pulled the thing or just ran out. what I'm saying is it took a long time for action on t11's part and I think many of us are just wanting a REAL response from them and not more marketing phsyco babble. they have been demonized cause they been acting the part of the villian.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 14, 2007 11:22AM)
The idea of gaining access to a living magician's invention without also having their instructions and to go on claiming discoveries using that invention without getting their permission is just plain creepy.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 11:56AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 12:22, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
The idea of gaining access to a living magician's invention without also having their instructions and to go on claiming discoveries using that invention without getting their permission is just plain creepy.
[/quote]

In all respect Jon we are talking about a little coin trick. I can think of things going on in the world(or in your town for that matter) that are a hell of a lot creepier..

Sorry, but at the end of the day this whole thing is really trivial in the grand scheme of things...lets choose our words carefully guys.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 12:07PM)
One other thing to think about guys...

Technically this thing is actually HELPING Steve D. What if this fiasco hadn't happened? Was Steve D going to release DD himself? No. This whole thing has given him MASS exposure to a new generation of magicians. I am willing to bet that because of this whole thing he sees his sales increase dramatically. Controversy sales, plain and simple. People who have no interest in Steve's material will buy it just to see what this whole argument is about. There are guys on here buying his products because they "feel bad". They are buying on an emotional hook. They are litteraly sending him money to make themselves feel better! Look at how many veiws this thread has, over 8000! That is a lot of FREE MARKETING for Steve D. Not to mention all the other forums(genii, theory11, etc.) that his name and materials are mentioned, over and over and over again.

STEVE D SHOULD BE THANKING THEORY 11 FOR ALL THE FREE PUBLICITY. doesn't matter if its good or bad, still publicity. In this case its good because Steve D is portrayed as the "poor old sick guy" who got gangbanged by the evil corporate magicians.

Would love to see your sales numbers in the next few months Steve D....
Message: Posted by: Steve Dusheck (Nov 14, 2007 12:10PM)
Most of the magicians do not know the difference between my sliding shell and mt Slippery Sam Combination Coins. They are two different items. I put out my single sliding shell trick frist. About a year later I made the combination coins that were later renamed Slippery Sam by Eddie Gibson. The Slippery Sam set consisted of a shimmed half dollar sliding shell and a shimmed English penny sliding shell. It also included a half dollar with a magnet in it and an English penny with a magnet in it. It was also supposed to have a Chinese coin included but at that time Gibson could not make or obtain Chinese coins.
The instructions for Slippery Sam said that it is a magnetic version of the C/S Transpo I already was making and selling for years. The original C/S Transpo routine was included in with the other routines in the instructions. Since all four of the coins with the Slippery Sam trick are gimmicked there is no single Slippery sam gimmick. There is a sliding shell and a shimmed sliding shell.
I get tired of proving I created the trick over and over again. It is part of the Theory 11 plan to prove I didn't invent the gimmick they copied. They know most magic Café readers don't read through all the pages of a topic so they like to load up the most recent pages with comments from their friends.
My Slippery Sam instructions also include the Thumb Display being credited to Bob Elliot by the Theory 11 group. And the Slippery Sam instructions also have a trick using two sliding shells which is now being classed as a brand new idea and has the machinists copying from each other.
My original magic catalog was an ongoing, growing list of my creations. Whene ever I have enough new tricks to fill a page I updated my catalog and sent the updates to my magician friends and customers. My C/S Transpo is listed in the first section of the catalog so I was producing it in 1965. My Combination Coins were in the second section section so I produced the first sets of them in 1966. My third version of the C/S effect, called Phase Three was in the last, or 1967 section.
That is hard copy proof of when I was offering my creations for sale.
Looking throuh the magic lists sent out by magic dealers and the reviews for my tricks in magic magazines shows that I am the only one credited with creating the sliding shell.
I only manufacture magic tricks that I create and that will not hurt anyone else financially. Anyone who knows the line of products I put out over the years knows that for a fact. Had anyone invented the sliding shell before me I would have asked permission to make my magnetic set and given them full credit and paid them a royalty.
It's amazing that after selling the trick for over 40 years to magic experts and gimmicked coin collectors no one has ever claimed my sliding shell was an old idea or that it was invented by someone else. That fact that my C/S Transpo was nationally advertised before it was published by Fulves is not hearsay. It is a hard fact. I knew Pressley was making my sliding shell. I didn't mind because he was not really competition. We went to different magic conventions. He was a friend and I even helped him with the noise problem his gimmick had. he did not steal the trick behind my back. He showed me his gimmick up front. Pressley used a half dollar sliding shell and it was not shimmed.
I doubt if any of the people involved with this topic can name a dozen of the multi-thousand selling tricks from the 300 original tricks I put out before I stopped selling to magic dealers yet the same people claim they only have my word for being the inventor of the sliding shell. At the same time they state the the Guitar gimmick predates my gimmick. Where is the proof? What is the date?
How about the personal smear stating I'm difficult to deal with? This is really a question of ruining my reputation so they have an excuse for using my gimmick, and my moves.
Only three of the people who posted here are friends of mine. A few are simply customers who bought my DVD and became fans of my thinking. The others I don't know at all.
I'm was a local magician before I was unable to perform. I did table magic in restaurants and strolling magic at parties and banquets. I had to do quick, visual magic because the management limited the time I was to spend at each table or group of people. I had to perform standing, often in casual clothing, and work from my pockets. I was not being paid to hide in the corner resetting my triks. Every trick I perform is instantly repeatable for the same audience. If you are a working magician you know there is always a group of people who follow you around because they love magic and because they hope to figure out how you did the tricks.
Bueno's trick might look good but it's the type of trick you do to impress the guys at the local magic club. It's not a trick for magicians working in the real world.
The magnet under a bandaid is not original either. It was put out with a shell penny in the mid 1960's. It did not sell well and did not become a classic. You can not wear a suit when you are booked to perform at a company picnic. I can do a magnetic pick off of the shell in short sleeves after showing my hand really empty. I used that move with my dime to penny to dime trick that is also on my 1965/1967 magic list. The coins were never touched yet they visibly changed.
One of the sources quoted, by the Theory 11 group, as proof that I didn't create the gimmick turned out to be a magazine that was not even published at that time.
About two years ago I came up with a really good trick using a Shogun Wallet. It is an original routine but I did not invent the Shogun Wallet. Elbert Gardner created that great prop. I didn't have a company make Shogun wallets for me just so I could put out my new trick. I typed the routine and sent it to Elbert to include with his wallets.
There are so many poor copies of Elbert Gardner's Shogun wallet that he will not invest in having moe of his produced. Thank you favorite magic dealer who sells the rip offs for the wallet too when you buy Digital Disolve.
It is not true that Schoolcraft is the only machinist I gave permission to make my sliding shell. I gave permission to all the machinists who asked for permission. None of them cared enough to send me a sample of their work or even e-mail a quick thank you. So when the magicians who bought my DVD e-mail asking me to recommend a machinist to buy from I can't help them.
Steve
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 14, 2007 12:19PM)
Hart are you the one that's friends with BJ or somthing I can;t remember. it shows how little class you have to trying discredit steve, why justifing t11 actions saying its done nothing but help steve.

how about I steal your work but be sure to hand out your buisness card along with mine
Message: Posted by: viris (Nov 14, 2007 12:22PM)
I don't think that was heresay. Ya, what he ^ said, shame on you Hart.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 12:31PM)
Just trying to put things in perspective. Shame on me? I have stolen nothing from anybody or attempted to "discredit" anyone. When did I discredit Steve D? I am not friends with BJ Bueno. I stand by my posts...and even sign my name to them.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 12:34PM)
But seriously Steve D, have sales picked up since this started? Be honest...

Isn't it fair to say that he has gained more from this theory11 thing? What has he lossed? Any more than if theory11 hadn't made this mistake? Think about it for a minute...
Message: Posted by: princehal (Nov 14, 2007 12:38PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 13:34, Hart Keene wrote:
But seriously Steve D, have sales picked up since this started? Be honest...

[/quote]

Why would this matter?

So if I steal something from you, and you get on local tv, and get a job offerr from it; it was ok for me to steal from you?

Good Grief!
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 12:42PM)
But what if this hadn't happened? Would he really be better off? Please explain...

Now he is a martyr that has been exposed to thousands of magicians who wouldn't have known about him or his products otherwise. Correct?

Not defending theft, just trying to put things in perspective. Do you guys really not think this will help him financially? Like I said before, ITS NOT LIKE HE WAS GOING TO RELEASE DD HIMSELF. Steve D said it himself, DD is an inferior version, of course he wasnt going to release DD! But now because of this fiasco people are exposed to the good version of the trick, which he happens to sell.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 14, 2007 12:46PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 13:34, Hart Keene wrote:
...Isn't it fair to say that he has gained more from this theory11 thing? What has he lossed? Any more than if theory11 hadn't made this mistake? Think about it for a minute...
[/quote]

To even consider that sort of heartless cynical marketing perspective about this matter and it's implied statement about Mr Dusheck's values to condone such marketing goes beyond the pale.

Thank you (all) for showing the content of your character.
Message: Posted by: princehal (Nov 14, 2007 12:50PM)
Some think character does not matter if it comes to money.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 12:53PM)
The content of my character? You don't even know me Jon. Just trying to put things in perspective...

Still no one has answered my earlier question, what should theory 11 do? What would make you guys happy? Should they just can their whole business? Pay Steve royalties? What!!!!

Steve and others continue to bash theory 11 but what in the hell do you guys want?
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 14, 2007 12:55PM)
Thank you Jon for putting my exact feelings into a much more polite wording as my immediate reaction would have looked like "***********" ***************** ** ********* ****** **************** ************************ etc etc and then I may have incurred a time out!
Hart, you have a lot to learn and I will discount your ridiculous ramblings to age and immaturity and hope that in time you will grow up!
Mick
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 01:01PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 13:55, MickeyPainless wrote:
Thank you Jon for putting my exact feelings into a much more polite wording as my immediate reaction would have looked like "***********" ***************** ** ********* ****** **************** ************************ etc etc and then I may have incurred a time out!
Hart, you have a lot to learn and I will discount your ridiculous ramblings to age and immaturity and hope that in time you will grow up!
Mick
[/quote]

What do you think theory11 should do then Mickey? Please enlighten us...

I was just putting another spin on things, that's immature? Would you not agree that Steve is getting mass exposure from this that he wouldn't have gotten otherwise? Are you really that closed minded and "immature" to not admit the obvious? Whats done is done, theory11 cant take it back. Just trying to get you guys to look on the bright side of all this. I think you guys know Im right(not morally, but realistically), and that is why you are getting upset with me.
Message: Posted by: princehal (Nov 14, 2007 01:02PM)
Christ got a lot of exposure from the crucification too... he should be thankful?
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 01:07PM)
He died for you and me, we should be thankful...

BTW, we are talking about a freaking coin trick here buddy, not nailing Steve D's hands and feet to a wooden cross. Get real dude...

So I guess the "Café JURY" is still out on the disciplinary action to be brought against theory11 for their supposed wrong doing. Is anyone going to make a suggestion or just continue the bashing...
Message: Posted by: princehal (Nov 14, 2007 01:10PM)
Excuse me, pal, you are the one bringing up strawmen. I just got a little more ridiculous than your "argument" that SD should be gratefull. Why no comments on his post of an hour ago? It was, the horses mouth, you know...
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Nov 14, 2007 01:28PM)
Mick you madman...:D And interesting point prince...Think JT was pretty much speaking in these terms. But hey, I thought we were nailing T11's butts to the cross here??? Since we're getting all religious and all, I wonder what Jesus would think about all this?...Give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's...Hmmmmmmm.

Hey Hart, c'mon on man...:) You're beginning to sound like the mom that's petitioning the warden for a stay of execution for her beloved son, who incidently got caught while teaching sunday school, raping 3 little 10yr. old girls. C'mon dude, I know these guys are your boys, but c'mon.

Anyway, I think he should get royalties, part of the company, a public apology and a few of the hot chicks those young well-to-do whippersnappers surely have in their various stashes. ;) And the apologies should be posted from each one of the supposed braintrust at T11, that includes the old gangsters there, the new young gangsters-in-training, the young CEO, and the dog there they probably don't feed. There, I said it! When can Steve expect these assortments of payment from the folks we obviously can't trust but you can?
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 01:37PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 14:28, Mb217 wrote:
Hey Hart, c'mon on man...:) You're beginning to sound like the mom that's petitioning the warden for a stay of execution for her beloved son, who incidently got caught while teaching sunday school, raping 3 little 10yr. old girls. C'mon dude, I know these guys are your boys, but c'mon.

Anyway, I think he should get royalties, part of the company, a public apology and a few of the hot chicks those young well-to-do whippersnappers surely have in their various stashes. ;) And the apologies should be posted from each one of the supposed braintrust at T11, that includes the old gangsters there, the new young gangsters-in-training, the young CEO, and the dog there they probably don't feed. There, I said it! When can Steve expect these assortments of payment from the folks we obviously can't trust but you can?

-In God We Trust.
[/quote]

I think this is a little different than raping 10 year olds man. LOL

But seriously, what should theory11 do for him? All I was saying earlier is that REALISTICALLY this has done more good than harm for Steve. Can someone explain how I am wrong? Would Steve be in a better position than he is now had there been no DD? Think of all these forums mentioning his materials, name, greatness, etc.
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 14, 2007 02:14PM)
All I know is that steve has lost more money then a increase to sales of a 10 dollar dvd will ever make up buy people like t11 over time. so does that make it fair for t11 to jump on the rip off steve bandwagon?
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 14, 2007 02:20PM)
Let us assume (which is all any of us but Steve and his Dr can do) that Steve's health prior to DD and T11 was fine. Now (again assumption) due to the upset and or emotional distress it caused a decline in health.......... Now how does your "more good than harm" statement play?
Hart, before you jump back with a "yeah but" statement or theory, think long and hard about what is worth more, money, property and prestige or ones health and well being!
Message: Posted by: Steve Dusheck (Nov 14, 2007 02:20PM)
I am not in a better position than I was before DD. If you knew anything about me you would know that all of my top selling items were copied and I have no magic to sell. I sold out of my C/S Transpo effects at my farewell lecture. With so many machinists making my sliding shell I could not afford to invest in another 300. I have no magic to sell so how can my business be better? I can't put any of my new items on the market because they will be copied too.
Now theory 11 has taken the credit for inventing the sliding shell from me. So I am worse off than before. I am especially saddened by the number of mean people who know nothing about me or the line of magic I created but continue to attack me while pretending not to be friends with the theory 11 people.
My business is not better Hart and I didn't need DD to make me famous again. The magicians like the theory 11 people and their stooges are the reason I stopped selling magic to magic dealers. The choice to stop making my new tricks available except to close friends was my own. If I want fame I simply have to put out one of my new coin tricks. But I do want the credit due me for my past creations.
It is not just my little coin trick that was copied. It is the many of thousands of dollars in profit that the trick will produce for theory 11. It is the thousands of dollars I will lose because they will flood the market with their copy.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 02:24PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 15:14, Joshua Barrett wrote:
All I know is that steve has lost more money then a increase to sales of a 10 dollar dvd will ever make up buy people like t11 over time. so does that make it fair for t11 to jump on the rip off steve bandwagon?
[/quote]

Not at all. But whats done is done and at least theory11 is attempting(as far as we know) to make it right. I cant speak for all the other rip offs as that is not the subject of this topic. But can you explain how this particular "rip off" has done more harm than good? Keeping in mind that Steve would never have released DD and had given permission to Schoolcraft to mass produce his gimmick...

Please don't get upset with me guys, I feel that I have a right to raise these questions if you all have a right to trash reputations on the same grounds. But at the end of the day I personally have never ripped anyone off and don't intend to do so. So please don't take your frustrations out on me...
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 02:25PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 15:20, MickeyPainless wrote:
Let us assume (which is all any of us but Steve and his Dr can do) that Steve's health prior to DD and T11 was fine. Now (again assumption) due to the upset and or emotional distress it caused a decline in health.......... Now how does your "more good than harm" statement play?
Hart, before you jump back with a "yeah but" statement or theory, think long and hard about what is worth more, money, property and prestige or ones health and well being!
[/quote]

So now Theory11 is responsible for Steve's decline in health? Is that the accusation you are making?
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 02:33PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 15:20, Steve Dusheck wrote:
I am not in a better position than I was before DD. If you knew anything about me you would know that all of my top selling items were copied and I have no magic to sell. I sold out of my C/S Transpo effects at my farewell lecture. With so many machinists making my sliding shell I could not afford to invest in another 300. I have no magic to sell so how can my business be better? I can't put any of my new items on the market because they will be copied too.
Now theory 11 has taken the credit for inventing the sliding shell from me. So I am worse off than before. I am especially saddened by the number of mean people who know nothing about me or the line of magic I created but continue to attack me while pretending not to be friends with the theory 11 people.
My business is not better Hart and I didn't need DD to make me famous again. The magicians like the theory 11 people and their stooges are the reason I stopped selling magic to magic dealers. The choice to stop making my new tricks available except to close friends was my own. If I want fame I simply have to put out one of my new coin tricks. But I do want the credit due me for my past creations.
It is not just my little coin trick that was copied. It is the many of thousands of dollars in profit that the trick will produce for theory 11. It is the thousands of dollars I will lose because they will flood the market with their copy.
[/quote]

I am truly sorry Steve. I really mean that. I wanted there to be a bright side to this and you are saying that there isn't.

So I guess there really is no difference if they had or hadn't released DD? Would you have sold more of the original had they not released DD? Or was there already to many rip offs? So theory11 is just icing on the cake. Yes? I don't understand...

Now what then? How can you be repaid? What would you want theory 11 to do?
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 14, 2007 02:35PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 15:25, Hart Keene wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 15:20, MickeyPainless wrote:
Let us assume (which is all any of us but Steve and his Dr can do) that Steve's health prior to DD and T11 was fine. Now (again assumption) due to the upset and or emotional distress it caused a decline in health.......... Now how does your "more good than harm" statement play?
Hart, before you jump back with a "yeah but" statement or theory, think long and hard about what is worth more, money, property and prestige or ones health and well being!
[/quote]

So now Theory11 is responsible for Steve's decline in health? Is that the accusation you are making?
[/quote]

I'm pretty sure he had health problems before so lets not go down that road.

I know your just trying to show the other side Hart but I know I'm tired of talking about this in a way, cause most of this has been said 5 times before then the threads get deleted.

I look at it this way. if you spent your entire life doing magic, and it being ripped off CONSTANTLY, wouldn;t everytime someone new does it not make it worse, if you know what I mean
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Nov 14, 2007 02:39PM)
Hart my man, I think people won't entertain your "theory" here because it's sorta along the lines that after surviving something awful, you should just be grateful that you're still alive, be happy with the settlement and get over it. Your idea that all the interest shown here is good for business as to Steve is a bit out there. This was not all about money and selling things. It had most to do with principle. Steve does not sound to me like that young CEO looks. That guy and t T11 are out to make money, mounds of it if at all possible. Steve is not about that, and certainly not about making it that way. I think therein lies the difference.

Not sure Steve is in any such "better position" here. On the contrary, the guy is sick and having to defend himself not at 100% against those that have been proven to be little more than enterprising marauders. I know, I know, they may not be exactly ethical but they're you're friends...:) Ok, but personalize it a bit...suppose this guy was your dad, how would you deal with this in dealing with them in what they did to your father. You wouldn't want to be hearing about any friend of theirs twisting things around to supposedly make things better. Actually, you'd probably want a settlement from such nonsense that these guys put your dear old dad through.

Dusheck was great before this argument started and he doesn't need what you think he's gotten from all this. Hey, since you think no one here is answering you (what they are really doing is not playing your game of "Let's look on the bright side here.") what do you think should be done to make ammends by T11?
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 14, 2007 02:41PM)
Personally I think they should, but won't.... give him the profits after production and marketing costs for what they sold. then leave it at that and make the thing only a memory
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 14, 2007 02:43PM)
For cryin out loud! I used the word ASSUME in all the proper context so if you are so ignorant to miss my point then I'll let it lay right there!
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 02:45PM)
We don't need the insults Mickey, that's a little immature ;)
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 14, 2007 02:47PM)
Not an insult, just an observation!
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 14, 2007 02:51PM)
Guys settle down please. or take it to pm's I don't want to see another thread deleted and that's helps no one
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 14, 2007 02:53PM)
I agree Josh and for my actions in public, I apologize!
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 02:56PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 15:39, Mb217 wrote:
Hart my man, I think people won't entertain your "theory" here because it's sorta along the lines that after surviving something awful, you should just be grateful that you're still alive, be happy with the settlement and get over it. Your idea that all the interest shown here is good for business as to Steve is a bit out there. This was not all about money and selling things. It had most to do with principle. Steve does not sound to me like that young CEO looks. That guy and t T11 are out to make money, mounds of it if at all possible. Steve is not about that, and certainly not about making it that way. I think therein lies the difference.

Not sure Steve is in any such "better position" here. On the contrary, the guy is sick and having to defend himself not at 100% against those that have been proven to be little more than enterprising marauders. I know, I know, they may not be exactly ethical but they're you're friends...:) Ok, but personalize it a bit...suppose this guy was your dad, how would you deal with this in dealing with them in what they did to your father. You wouldn't want to be hearing about any friend of theirs twisting things around to supposedly make things better. Actually, you'd probably want a settlement from such nonsense that these guys put your dear old dad through.

Dusheck was great before this argument started and he doesn't need what you think he's gotten from all this. Hey, since you think no one here is answering you (what they are really doing is not playing your game of "Let's look on the bright side here.") what do you think should be done to make ammends by T11?
[/quote]

I don't know what should be done! that's why I was asking you guys! LOL

You all like bashing theory11 and its artists but don't have any solutions on how to resolve it. Whats done is done and at this time the effect is off the market so should we just leave the horse lay and hope that theory11 learned a valuable lesson?

I do feel that my earlier speculation on this whole thing doing more good than harm for Steve is no worse than your(some of you)speculation on the artists of theory11 having cruel/hurtfull intentions toward Steve.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 14, 2007 02:57PM)
Seems there there are things which go beyond chutzpah. Every time you let an apologist sock puppet for t11 distract you... time wasted.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 02:59PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 15:53, MickeyPainless wrote:
I agree Josh and for my actions in public, I apologize!
[/quote]

You don't need to take my thoughts so personal Mickey. Remember, I have not stole anything from anybody. Just offering up some alternative thoughts on the subject. Without me this would be a pretty boring thread. Maybe you should thank me. Do you usually just insult people who feel differently than you?
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 03:01PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 15:57, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
Seems there there are things which go beyond chutzpah. Every time you let an apologist sock puppet for t11 distract you... time wasted.
[/quote]

So I'm a sock puppet Jon?
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 14, 2007 03:01PM)
Let's not forget villain in training. - it was supposed to be a comma delimited list - not just a string of adjectives :)
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 14, 2007 03:06PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 15:59, Hart Keene wrote:...Just offering up some alternative thoughts on the subject. Without me this would be a pretty boring thread...[/quote]

Perhaps after you actually have seen the product you can participate in a more productive way?

But thanks for the entertainment. Maybe someday you will have that favor returned about something precious to you.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 03:14PM)
Sock puppet? Villain in training? Pretty harsh Jon...I forget, what have I done to you again?
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 03:15PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 16:06, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 15:59, Hart Keene wrote:...Just offering up some alternative thoughts on the subject. Without me this would be a pretty boring thread...[/quote]

Perhaps after you actually have seen the product you can participate in a more productive way?

But thanks for the entertainment. Maybe someday you will have that favor returned about something precious to you.
[/quote]

Of course I am not going to buy a product in question! You forget that the product is off the market now...
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 03:17PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 16:06, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 15:59, Hart Keene wrote:...Just offering up some alternative thoughts on the subject. Without me this would be a pretty boring thread...[/quote]

Perhaps after you actually have seen the product you can participate in a more productive way?

But thanks for the entertainment. Maybe someday you will have that favor returned about something precious to you.
[/quote]

Glad I can entertain you Jon. Maybe someday I can have as many posts as you and throw out witty little insults like yourself...
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 14, 2007 03:26PM)
Jon I'm not sure what your trying to accomplish other then thread deletion
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Nov 14, 2007 03:35PM)
Guess JT is calling a spade a spade as he see's it. Right or wrong, you just gotta do that sometimes, come hell or highwater.

As to his mention of "Sock Puppet" (pretty funny really :D ), I found this on the internet about it. I guess if the sock fits, eh? :

-Something that should be kept in a drawer, or underfoot.
-Something which speaks other people's words for other people agendas.
-Something which stinks as it speaks
-Something which is only as real as the audience cares to pretend.


Hey Hart, hard to believe you're not just playing "Devil's Advocate" here to stir the pot...You are just "playing" aren't you?
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 03:43PM)
Guess my opinion is not valid here so I will go. Please stop with the insults.

Next time I will make sure to jump on the bandwagon...

DOWN WITH THEORY 11!!!! ;)
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Nov 14, 2007 03:50PM)
Awww Hart, c'mon man...You're bigger than that. You're certainly due your opinion, as others are also. It goes both ways. I don't personally agree with you, but I respect your right to say your beliefs. I don't necessarily believe that Steve is any better off for going through all this, but your relentless defense of your friends has kept the discussion going, and I believe has allowed the truth to be drawn more and more into focus. I'm pro-Steve Duschek, not to be on any side, but because I think he stands for principle and character, and I think in all this he has shown that. Can't say as much (as you do) for Theory 11.

Hey, but on the real side, stick around man...It's your house too.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 04:15PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 16:50, Mb217 wrote:
Awww Hart, c'mon man...You're bigger than that. You're certainly due your opinion, as others are also. It goes both ways. I don't personally agree with you, but I respect your right to say your beliefs. I don't necessarily believe that Steve is any better off for going through all this, but your relentless defense of your friends has kept the discussion going, and I believe has allowed the truth to be drawn more and more into focus. I'm pro-Steve Duschek, not to be on any side, but because I think he stands for principle and character, and I think in all this he has shown that. Can't say as much (as you do) for Theory 11.

Hey, but on the real side, stick around man...It's your house too.
[/quote]

Thanks Mb, I am not "friends" with theory11. In fact, I don't own any of their products! It sounds to me like you are all "friends" with Steve D and I just stepped into the wrong argument and am taking all the heat.

Starting to feel like Jesus dying on the cross that princepal mentioned earlier, only I am being crucified for the sins of theory11. LOL

Listen guys, there are a lot of names involved with theory 11 that I respect and have done a lot for magic. It takes a lot less to destroy a reputation than it does to build one. I just don't want to sit here and watch a bunch of guys on an online forum tarnish good names without having ALL the facts straight. Fair enough?
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 14, 2007 04:22PM)
I can understand that hart but everytime they persent a fact it has come out as a lie. do a search t11 when they first came out, you will see how supportive I was of them. don;t think this is somthing to do with trying make MY HEROS look bad. if you think this does not suck for me your wrong. kenners book was and is one of the best things I own and if you think this is not a let down for me your wrong
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 14, 2007 04:41PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 17:22, Joshua Barrett wrote:
I can understand that hart but everytime they persent a fact it has come out as a lie. do a search t11 when they first came out, you will see how supportive I was of them. don;t think this is somthing to do with trying make MY HEROS look bad. if you think this does not suck for me your wrong. kenners book was and is one of the best things I own and if you think this is not a let down for me your wrong
[/quote]

So kenner is automatically at fault on this? It sucks that you are making him guilty by association. Do you think its possible that many of the members on theory 11 didn't know what was going on until it was to late?

Lets say that its just BJ in the wrong. Are you guys really going to help destroy the reputations of the other guys? Its not like they joined forces after the release of DD. They were a group before all this stuff started.

You guys make it sound like they all sat around this large "evil" round table to plot against Steve D. Some of you have gone as far as saying that they were taking advantage of his health condition! None of this crap is factual information. But when people think back on this years down the road I don't know if there will be a clear line drawn between the facts and what some guy on an internet forum imagined. This is how crazy rumors get started. Rumors that hurt.

Steve D is definitely a victim in all of this but I have to wonder if there are members of theory 11 who will have been victimized when this is all said and done. Members who had no direct involvement in the realease of DD.
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 14, 2007 09:52PM)
No I'm not blaming kenner personally, not what so ever. I'm just saying that your not the only one that wants this to be a mere mistake.
Message: Posted by: joejonesonline (Nov 15, 2007 01:00AM)
After close to a year of just reading, this is my first post on the Café. So hi everyone.

I've an answer for Hart's earlier questions regarding what at least I think Theory 11 should do:

1. Unequivocally apologize to Steve Dusheck.
2. Pay a royalty of at least 25% of all past and future gross sales of DD to Steve Dusheck.
3. Reprint all instructions and marketing materials to say "created by Steve Dusheck."

Legal issues aside for the time being, they have a moral obligation to pay Mr. Dusheck. At the end of the day, the markers of this effect believed that they needed permission from Mr. Dusheck in order to sell a C/S transpo. They owe him now.

Joe
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Nov 15, 2007 01:19PM)
Welcome to the Café Joe :) , and I think to Hart's request here, you have given a good view and response (Thought I gave one too). But more seriously here, it sounds fair to me and I would agree to it unless it could be made even fairer, whatever that is. But it's certainly in the right direction of making any real and lasting honest ammends. Good shoot man! ;) And again, "Welcome." :)

Brave Hart, what sayest thou? :)
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Nov 15, 2007 02:54PM)
I think it's time to let this be sorted out between Steve Dusheck and T11. Good luck to them.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 15, 2007 02:56PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-15 02:00, joejonesonline wrote:
After close to a year of just reading, this is my first post on the Café. So hi everyone.

I've an answer for Hart's earlier questions regarding what at least I think Theory 11 should do:

1. Unequivocally apologize to Steve Dusheck.
2. Pay a royalty of at least 25% of all past and future gross sales of DD to Steve Dusheck.
3. Reprint all instructions and marketing materials to say "created by Steve Dusheck."

Legal issues aside for the time being, they have a moral obligation to pay Mr. Dusheck. At the end of the day, the markers of this effect believed that they needed permission from Mr. Dusheck in order to sell a C/S transpo. They owe him now.

Joe
[/quote]

Thank you Joe! Although quite a controversial issue to comment on in your first post!

I would agree that what joe posted would be fair repayment. Obviously the best thing would have been to not make the mistake in the first place but as I have said many times whats dones is done.

Seeing that there are so many talented artists on theory 11 whom I'm sure have excellent offerings planned for the future I feel it would be best to just leave this product off the market. It is so tainted that I feel even if repackaged with Steve D's name it still wouldn't take away the bad taste in everyone's mouth.

I really hope my earlier posts didn't offend anyone. I am not a puppet of theory 11 and I don't know Steve D personally. I am simply a third party who wants to give artists with excellent track records the benefit of the doubt. I am willing to bet that if most of you saw the theory 11 artists face to face you wouldn't dare bring this up, you would be to busy kissing their @ss. Easy to throw stones on an online forum, eh guys?

As for townsend and his insults...well I think that townsend loves seeing anything with Kenner's name on it come under fire. Cant imagine why;)
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 15, 2007 03:01PM)
Hart I'm not mad on you although fustrating ;) I understad what you were tring to do.

any as a side note I spoke with bj for a hour on the phone about this when this first started, was about as close to face to face as I can get ;)
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 15, 2007 03:06PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-15 16:01, Joshua Barrett wrote:
Hart I'm not mad on you although fustrating ;) I understad what you were tring to do.

any as a side note I spoke with bj for a hour on the phone about this when this first started, was about as close to face to face as I can get ;)
[/quote]

You know what I mean Josh. Like Steve Brooks said in his latest interview with Magic, people will say things on here that they would never dream of saying face to face.
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 15, 2007 03:12PM)
Very true, I know I'm guilty of it. I think the web makes everyone more liberal when it comes to communication, I think mostly cause it lacks that human factor
Message: Posted by: jimbowmanjr (Nov 15, 2007 03:14PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-15 16:06, Hart Keene wrote:
You know what I mean Josh. Like Steve Brooks said in his latest interview with Magic, people will say things on here that they would never dream of saying face to face.
[/quote]

I would like to hope that isn't true, but I am probably naive in thinking that way. It is a small world we live in an even smaller when it comes to magic. Personally I have never said anything on here that I would have a problem saying to another person's face. I am too old to be a message board warrior...

I have run into quite a few guys from the Café on occasion and I don't even get out much. Then again most hide behind some phony anonymous user name as a security blanket. Ah well such is life on the internet!

--Jim
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Nov 15, 2007 04:30PM)
I agree Jim, whatever I say here I would say directly to anyone's face and would have no problem with it and wouldn't stutter a bit. I doubt those kids on T11 would be all that much of any sort of problem to speak directly to...None of them look like they even know what a real problem is. Trust me, I've seen real problems upclose and personal...too close at times. Glad to be here today to even be able to say that. God is good.

Oh well, hopefully some honor is shown in all this to all those that deserve it, by all those that should show it. But certainly the can has been kicked here in all sorts of ways. Hopefully for the better. -Mb
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 15, 2007 05:01PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-15 15:56, Hart Keene wrote:...
I really hope my earlier posts didn't offend anyone. ...
As for townsend and his insults...well ...
[/quote]

Yup, still at it with the insults even by indirection.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 15, 2007 09:12PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 16:26, Joshua Barrett wrote:
Jon I'm not sure what your trying to accomplish other then thread deletion
[/quote]

I asked him via PM if he had seen the Digital Dissolve DVD and the clip where folks are hanging out at Kenner's place deciding on a name for the item.

He told me via return PM that he did not have the product.

So - again, IHMO it helps to have the product to know what's being discussed - rather than just offering distraction.

Still clueless about why non-involved parties are discussing legal and economic issues which are pretty much between Dusheck and the parties at T11.
Message: Posted by: pepka (Nov 16, 2007 04:07AM)
I can't believe I just spent 1.5 hours reading every single post on this thread. I'm also surprised it hasn't been deleted yet. I don't have much expertise on this sort of thing, but that hasn't stopped others. (Not naming names.) Here's my peacenik take on everything.

I've never met Steve, but I have heard nothing but wonderful things about him and his magic. Some very good friends of mine who speak highly of him are Scott Sullivan, Marc Desouza and Denny Haney. These are 3 people who's opinions matter a great deal to me. If they say Steve's a good guy, then he's a good guy. On the other side of the equation is T11. When they started when the hype before the site launched, I was very weary. I really don't care for a lot of this ellusionist type of mass marketing of magic. There was one major difference in this company though. They had some MAJOR names to back them up. I have a lot of respect for Aaron, Lee, and Chris having gotten to spend some time with Lee and Chris, I know that they truly love magic and I don't believe that they would intentionally do anything underhanded. But hey, people make mistakes. All we know for sure is that somewhere along the line, someone got greedy and misrepresented the facts. People make mistakes. I really hope that this all gets straightened out. I think that T11 has taken a step in the right direction by suspending sales, even if it was just to save face. Now let's see if they keep it up by doing the right thing.
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Nov 16, 2007 07:58AM)
Amen. Now quick, lock the thread!
Message: Posted by: djkuttdecks (Nov 16, 2007 09:26AM)
As a working DJ in the music business, I have to deal with copyright law quite regularly. In fact, I have a degree in it. The proper and legal thing to do is simple. Is there a copy write infringement? This means, have exact words/ visual prints/ or currently patented materials been duplicated? This doesn't even mean sold, the actual duplication of a product is illegal. If this is the case, SD has the right to file a cease and desist of the offending product and ALL profits illegally gained must be rendered to SD after government taxes. I can quote the case of Sean Puffy Combs vs. Sting & Brumley music. A copyright lasts 75 years after the last authors death before that copyright becomes public domain. Fact is, even if SD did not make a copyright through the united states library of congress, a copyright is created the moment the product is put into tangible format. So , even the print ups in magazines which he mentioned are considered a valid proof of copyright. Also, it is true that a creator CAN NOT copyright an idea, only the materials that pertain to that idea... this means the "routines" themselves. If an offending duplication is made but used in a completely original way... your out of luck, welcome to the free market! However, this is not the case. An apology is not required by law (although it is always a nice thing to do). To refer back to Sean Puffy Combs VS. Sting and Brumley Music, Mr. Combs decided to continue to release his stolen work and to this day all profits are legally rendered to Sting and Brumley music. The only situation in which intellectual property made may be duplicated are in the matters of education, religious purposes, and parody. All other works be they duplicated or derivative are subject to the laws stated by the US copyright law under the Sonny Bono act "Public Law 105-298"

Just my 2 cents,
-DJ
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 16, 2007 01:10PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-15 22:12, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-14 16:26, Joshua Barrett wrote:
Jon I'm not sure what your trying to accomplish other then thread deletion
[/quote]

I asked him via PM if he had seen the Digital Dissolve DVD and the clip where folks are hanging out at Kenner's place deciding on a name for the item.


Still clueless about why non-involved parties are discussing legal and economic issues which are pretty much between Dusheck and the parties at T11.
[/quote]

Are you serious Jon? I would never buy a product in question!!!! Did you buy the product?

Are you not also here discussing this issue? Pot calling the kettle black, eh Jon?
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 16, 2007 01:13PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-16 08:58, rutabaga wrote:
Amen. Now quick, lock the thread!
[/quote]

You don't have to keep reading. You can always "lock" it out of your mind, ya know?
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Nov 16, 2007 01:40PM)
It wasn't for my sake that I suggested the thread be locked.
Message: Posted by: Steve Dusheck (Nov 16, 2007 02:21PM)
I just took one of my pills so I could visit the Café without getting upset. Today I received Digital Disolve in the mail. The person who bought it gave it to me. I can honestly say the DVD and routines are very good. But the Bueno handling is the standard putting both coins in the persons hand and removing the gimmicked coin right out of Bo Bo. I cannot see how anyone could take full credit as the inventor of a trick using my gimmick and my display moves.
There is a move by Lee Asher that is very good and also practical. That deserves high praise.
They should have watched my DVD or read my instructions because they missed some important handing, that probably seemed minor to them, when first showing the coins.
I do not do street magic. I designed my handling so a lot of people could see the visual change rather than two or three people. The last place I performed for two years had 8 people at each table. I often did parties where I was surrounded by a large crowd of people so my visual change was performed at chest level. When I demonstrated the trick at conventions or when lecturing, everyone saw the instant change.
My routine evolved to become practical for every working condition. They should have shown my original routine on the DVD. They also missed out on one the lines I use that is very important.
The gimmck is well made but the shim serves no purpose and only adds bulk. The Teflon makes the gimmick too slippery. The noise problem can easily be corrected. I told Jamie there was more to making a sliding shell than just removing half the rim. He didn't want any additional help fro me. I'm sure Jamie and I will become friends again, in time, and I'll tell him how to fix the noise problem.
All in all it's a good product. I feel very bad that Bueno took all the credit.
By the way, I did not start this thread or have any of my friends start it. I do not know most of the people supporting me or the many magicians who send E-mail directly to me. Only three personal friends have contributed to this topic.
Steve
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 16, 2007 02:40PM)
Im glad the thread wasnt locked! Good post Steve.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 16, 2007 02:58PM)
I've never understood the noise issue some complain about! Although I had permission from Steve to use different machinists I simply followed his instructions in making the gaff myself and so far they've all turned out perfect!
I use Steve's handling as well and only modify the patter to fit my personality. I've fried many a mind with this trick, it's a keeper!
Mick
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Nov 16, 2007 10:12PM)
I have a pronounced sound problem with my set. jaime must think he's gods gift to coins to not accept constructive feedback from steve. steve should get a different machinist to produce his coins imo
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 16, 2007 10:19PM)
Like Steve has said above, Jamie is not the only one with permission. Lassen sells them too.

http://www.toddlassen.com/sam.htm
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Nov 16, 2007 10:37PM)
I wonder if todd's solve the noise problem. also I wonder if steve will find a machinist to make them affordable and not $135 a pop like todd's.
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 16, 2007 10:54PM)
The ones that are sold for DD are mass produced. It sacrifices "quality" for a competitive price. That's something that really couldn't be avoided with the price point they were at. Jamie will probably make you his premier version, but the price will be in Todd's range.
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 16, 2007 11:11PM)
That's the Silver Dollar price...The English Penny is only $60.
Message: Posted by: Evilstalkerhorne (Nov 17, 2007 04:13AM)
Everybody is complaining. Look, if you read Steves post he even claims that the Teflon is different than his gimmick. He even sites the presentation as being different and leaving parts out. That is at least one difference in each catigory. Stop complaining and just get on with your lives. Steve, if you think someone is ripping you off take them to court for your royalties and see what a Judge has to say about it. I also noticed that Theory 11 has taken the trick off the site. That is too bad, I am GLAD that I bought mine before they removed it:)
Sure you can all call me names and such I don't care! The trick is good, the gimmick is different, and furthermore appearently there is nowhere you can get a similar one? (I don't know personally, just from what I read on all your posts)
Stop complaining! Oh, and if anywone feels guilty about buying or having bought the DD thingy, I will take them off your hands. Just let me know and I will arrange for a PO box you can send them all to!
Message: Posted by: Evilstalkerhorne (Nov 17, 2007 04:15AM)
Oh, one more thing........ Steve's post talks about the secrets behind the Theory 11 trick. Isn't that a NO NO under Café rules? Just wanted to point that one out.
Message: Posted by: viris (Nov 17, 2007 04:37AM)
Is this guy ^ for real?

[quote]On 2007-11-17 05:13, Evilstalkerhorne wrote:
Stop complaining and just get on with your lives. Steve, if you think someone is ripping you off take them to court for your royalties and see what a Judge has to say about it. I also noticed that Theory 11 has taken the trick off the site. That is too bad, I am GLAD that I bought mine before they removed it:)

Are you ten years old? This is someones livelihood we are talking (typing) about here, this is a REAL person not just some letters and words on your computer screen. The guy just said he wasn't in the greatest health and you want him to start suing people, are you kidding me do you have any idea what that takes? Someone has to remove the last two posts please.
Message: Posted by: viris (Nov 17, 2007 04:53AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-17 05:15, Evilstalkerhorne wrote:
Oh, one more thing........ Steve's post talks about the secrets behind the Theory 11 trick. Isn't that a NO NO under Café rules? Just wanted to point that one out.
[/quote]
I was wrong in the above post you have to be 5. Cause my 8 year old would never say anthing that immature.
I think the original inventor of the gimmick can tip it off if he wants. Who are you or anyone else to tell him what he can and can't do with HIS product. Just when you think all the dumb things have been said about this topic, then someone ^^^comes along and tops it.
Message: Posted by: pepka (Nov 17, 2007 05:15AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-16 15:21, Steve Dusheck wrote:
I just took one of my pills so I could visit the Café without getting upset.
[/quote]
Man, where can I score some of those? We should all pop a couple when Evilstalkerhorne comes on here with his moronic BS.

Hang in there Steve, you have a lot of support here.
Message: Posted by: Crimson-Death (Nov 17, 2007 06:50AM)
Now, now guys, we cannot blame Evilstalkerhorne for missing this sentence in Dusheck's post:

[quote]
On 2007-11-16 15:21, Steve Dusheck wrote:
...I cannot see how anyone could take full credit as the inventor of a trick using my gimmick and my display moves.

[/quote]

He either forgot about it or it's selective reading, or we must truly blame the sorry state of our public schools.
Message: Posted by: jimbowmanjr (Nov 17, 2007 07:19AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-17 05:13, Evilstalkerhorne wrote:
Everybody is complaining. Look, if you read Steves post he even claims that the Teflon is different than his gimmick. He even sites the presentation as being different and leaving parts out. That is at least one difference in each catigory. Stop complaining and just get on with your lives. Steve, if you think someone is ripping you off take them to court for your royalties and see what a Judge has to say about it. I also noticed that Theory 11 has taken the trick off the site. That is too bad, I am GLAD that I bought mine before they removed it:)
Sure you can all call me names and such I don't care! The trick is good, the gimmick is different, and furthermore appearently there is nowhere you can get a similar one? (I don't know personally, just from what I read on all your posts)
Stop complaining! Oh, and if anywone feels guilty about buying or having bought the DD thingy, I will take them off your hands. Just let me know and I will arrange for a PO box you can send them all to!
[/quote]

The gimmick is differnt because there is a piece of teflon tape on it?? Seriously what planet are you from? I added a piece of cigarette box foil to my shell, wheee! Now I have my own line of gimmicks to sell right? Nice attempt at trolling this thread but your post is pretty transparent and your attitude towards original magic is disappointing to say the least.

--Jim
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Nov 17, 2007 11:16AM)
Amazing! Jim, it's folks like this, that just keep the wheels coming off the train. Unbelievable!

Anyway, this is quite a bit larger than just this discussion on the forum here...It's also covered in Genii and reviewed by David Regal, who basically sees it as it is, a ripoff!
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 17, 2007 12:09PM)
I just got the heads up about that review but I'm assuming it's in the Dec. issue!?!? Can't wait to read it!
I got a PM from Evilstalkerhorne even more ridiculous than his public display! I feel so special! :)
Mick
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 17, 2007 12:32PM)
Yes it's in the one with The Great Tomsomi on the cover. Well I'm assuming it's that one, since Genii had it on their site for a few days and then reverted back to the Max Maven cover. It is not out yet, so it looks like we all got the same heads up. I'm interested to see the reponses after it hits the mailboxes.
Message: Posted by: RCP (Nov 17, 2007 12:41PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-17 05:13, Evilstalkerhorne wrote:
Everybody is complaining. Look, if you read Steves post he even claims that the Teflon is different than his gimmick. He even sites the presentation as being different and leaving parts out. That is at least one difference in each catigory. Stop complaining and just get on with your lives. Steve, if you think someone is ripping you off take them to court for your royalties and see what a Judge has to say about it. I also noticed that Theory 11 has taken the trick off the site. That is too bad, I am GLAD that I bought mine before they removed it:)
Sure you can all call me names and such I don't care! The trick is good, the gimmick is different, and furthermore appearently there is nowhere you can get a similar one? (I don't know personally, just from what I read on all your posts)
Stop complaining! Oh, and if anywone feels guilty about buying or having bought the DD thingy, I will take them off your hands. Just let me know and I will arrange for a PO box you can send them all to!
[/quote]

Whats your address? Since I can't get one I would like to come and steal yours when your gone. I hope you got a nice plasma TV as well. Leave your wallet and keys were I can find them too. LOL
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 17, 2007 12:52PM)
The David Regal review is on page 113 of the December 2007 issue of [i]Genii Magazine[/i] - with "The Company Tomsoni" in a cartoon on the cover.
Message: Posted by: Roy McIlwee (Nov 20, 2007 04:43PM)
I was very pleased to see David Regal's review of Digital Dissolve in this Decembers issue of Genii Magazine. He really got it right in giving Steve Dusheck credit for inventing the sliding shell gimmick and not Mr. Bueno. I remember Steve showing us his Copper/Silver Transposition back in the late 1970s in a magic shop in Tamaqua, Penna. owned by Jeff O'Lear. Thank you, Roy McIlwee
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Nov 20, 2007 09:46PM)
I tried to pick up December's Genii at my local magic shop this weekend but they're sold out. It IS still November, isn't it?

I like to think it's either Steve supporters buying them to read the Regal thing, or perhaps T11 agents taking it off the shelves. Exciting stuff!
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 20, 2007 10:25PM)
It's doesn't look good for T11. Check out this little excerpt from Regal's review:

"Some of the artists I saw on this site are people I know and like, so I felt bad for them all when it looked like one of the Theory 11 releases accidentally copied an effect originally put out by Steve Dusheck....(I) wrote to Theory 11 to tell them that there was a good chance they inadvertently duplicated the Dusheck item. I received a reply that seemed, to my way of thinking, curious. Our series of back-and-forth emails revealed that,...it was intentional. In fact, permission was at one time sought from Mr. Dusheck, and that permission was refused."

That's pretty ***ing stuff. It basically says that they knew what they were doing and even told a reporter that that's how it went. He goes on to say that in emails T11 consistently tried to diminish Dusheck's involvement in the creation of the gaff and the trick.

He even says that besides a minor finger-handling variation the trick is the exact same as well.

As I said before, I was hoping for the best but fearing the worst. I'm sorry but I can't justify buying anything from them, no matter what they do. Their true stripes have already been exposed from the get-go.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 20, 2007 10:38PM)
Well, well, well!
I so look forward to receiving my monthly copy!
Mick
Message: Posted by: RCP (Nov 21, 2007 06:01AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-20 23:25, Chad Barnard wrote:
It's doesn't look good for T11. Check out this little excerpt from Regal's review:

"Some of the artists I saw on this site are people I know and like, so I felt bad for them all when it looked like one of the Theory 11 releases accidentally copied an effect originally put out by Steve Dusheck....(I) wrote to Theory 11 to tell them that there was a good chance they inadvertently duplicated the Dusheck item. I received a reply that seemed, to my way of thinking, curious. Our series of back-and-forth emails revealed that,...it was intentional. In fact, permission was at one time sought from Mr. Dusheck, and that permission was refused."

[/quote]
So the facts are now in and the record indisputable. It was and is a blatant, premeditated theft and nothing but lip service since being caught red handed. Shame on all connected with Theory 11, so what are you going to do to save your tarnished reputations?
Message: Posted by: pepka (Nov 21, 2007 07:27AM)
I would say writing a check to Steve in the ammount of EVERY DOLLAR THEY MADE off of DD would be a good start.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 21, 2007 08:05AM)
What say ye now young Mr Bayme?
Message: Posted by: jimbowmanjr (Nov 21, 2007 09:28AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-20 23:25, Chad Barnard wrote:
It's doesn't look good for T11. Check out this little excerpt from Regal's review:

"Some of the artists I saw on this site are people I know and like, so I felt bad for them all when it looked like one of the Theory 11 releases accidentally copied an effect originally put out by Steve Dusheck....(I) wrote to Theory 11 to tell them that there was a good chance they inadvertently duplicated the Dusheck item. I received a reply that seemed, to my way of thinking, curious. Our series of back-and-forth emails revealed that,...it was intentional. In fact, permission was at one time sought from Mr. Dusheck, and that permission was refused."

That's pretty ***ing stuff. It basically says that they knew what they were doing and even told a reporter that that's how it went. He goes on to say that in emails T11 consistently tried to diminish Dusheck's involvement in the creation of the gaff and the trick.

He even says that besides a minor finger-handling variation the trick is the exact same as well.

As I said before, I was hoping for the best but fearing the worst. I'm sorry but I can't justify buying anything from them, no matter what they do. Their true stripes have already been exposed from the get-go.
[/quote]

I have to say I feel duped and cheated at this point because I was under the impression that this was not intentionally done based on JB's comments here and on T11. I have always believed Steve's side of this story from the very beginning but I was holding out hope that this was an oversight and unintentional copy. I can see clearly form David Regal's review that nothing could be further from the truth at this point.

I have no idea what could truly bring any closure to this right now and it isn't for me to decide in all honesty. I hope that JB reaches out and offers more than consolation to Steve after all of this. A forthright and honest response to what really happened would also be appropriate in the T11 forums and here. If it means you part ways with an artist because of it then so be it but if you want to be taken seriously you can't have these skeletons hanging around in the closet.

This entire project involved quite a few people making some serious professional mistakes. As much as I hate singling anyone out the fact that permission was sought and denied and the product was still released raises serious character issues I have with BJ now. My other concern is who else knew that Steve declined permission to use his routine and gaff and still went along with it anyways. I have a feeling that BJ being the "creator" will take the fall on this one but we all know that there is no way he is the only person responsible for getting this onto the market.

--Jim
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 21, 2007 10:38AM)
Thank you david regal for a large publication article of what we all have been saying. t11 is going to have to hire more pr people now it seems. but I'm sure more underground hype will put them right in the world with the teens
Message: Posted by: magicandsoul (Nov 21, 2007 01:42PM)
David Regal's "review" mentions that "Some of the artists I saw on this site (T11) are people I know and like,". This is very significant and unmentioned in the last few posts concerning his "review". It says a great deal about Mr. Regal's integrity and really ups him and his products in my book. To give no review for the sake of not harming these artists would have definitely been the easy road.

I also like the last sentence of the review: "Considerations: See above." Again, the sign of a man with principles. Thank Mr. Regal, for taking the hard road.

Perhaps the young Mr. J. Bayme should take a chapter out of our elders book of character and read it a few more times in order to understand what true leadership & wisdom means. If T11 had a board of directors I would suggest that they personally and formally invite him to respond to Mr. Regal's "review" and ask him to factually account for it with appropriate and conclusive measures or hand them his resignation. I'm fairly sure that T11 can replace a young man in his twenties with a far more experienced and principled man that can erase this episode and guide T11 from scandal to success.

Again, thank you Mr. Regal & thank you Genii for your stance on this matter. All that is needed for bad guys to win is for good guys to do nothing.

In the case of T11-vs-Dusheck the court rules for the... (see above).

M&S
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 21, 2007 02:53PM)
Well as anyone who read this thread knows that yours truly wanted to give t11 the benefit of the doubt I don't know what to say at this point. Having read the entire review in the latest issue of Genii I also fear that the reputation of t11 is tarnished. They did the right thing by pulling if off the market but I'm not sure that will satisfy Steve D., or the magic fraternity for that matter.

If you want to boycott t11 that is understandable but I feel we should be carefull about how we "punish" the individual members seeing that we don't fully know the extent of their involvement. But having Bayme and Bueno on your $#!%list is probably justified at this point in time...
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 21, 2007 02:58PM)
See Hart, we do agree on something ;) I agree with everything you said.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 21, 2007 03:40PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-21 15:58, Chad Barnard wrote:
See Hart, we do agree on something ;) I agree with everything you said.
[/quote]

LOL!
Message: Posted by: RCP (Nov 21, 2007 07:02PM)
Congratulations Hart! You examined the evidence a came to the only conclusion one can reach. You are also right that not everyone associated with Theory 11 has been proven guilty. However, everyone associated with Theory 11 is tainted and should step forward and reclaim their good names by removing themselves and their products from such a company.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 21, 2007 09:20PM)
I've been away from home on biz since Mon. and was quite happy to return and find my copy of Genii sitting on my desk!
I'm anxious to see someone from T11's response!
Hart, despite our differences, I was happy to read your post and I do agree to some extent about punishing all involved. Hopefully "they" will find a suitable flea spray! :) *THAT IS A JOKE AS INDICATED BY THE SMILEY FACE*
Mick
Message: Posted by: dancingm0nk3y (Nov 21, 2007 10:09PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-21 15:53, Hart Keene wrote:
If you want to boycott t11 that is understandable but I feel we should be carefull about how we "punish" the individual members seeing that we don't fully know the extent of their involvement. But having Bayme and Bueno on your $#!%list is probably justified at this point in time...
[/quote]

I agree that it seems harsh, but guilty by association and all that. I think that if they stay with and support T11 then their integrity comes into question. It sucks, but hey that's business.

Does anyone else find it ironic that BJ Bueno is a marketing guru who specializes in corporate branding? Shouldn't he have forseen the possible backlash when they released this product?
Message: Posted by: bugjack (Nov 21, 2007 10:27PM)
[quote]
Does anyone else find it ironic that BJ Bueno is a marketing guru who specializes in corporate branding? Shouldn't he have forseen the possible backlash when they released this product?
[/quote]

Interesting -- I didn't know much about the guy. http://www.amazon.com/Power-Cult-Branding-Customers-Followers/dp/0761536949
Message: Posted by: djkuttdecks (Nov 22, 2007 12:32PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-21 08:27, pepka wrote:
I would say writing a check to Steve in the ammount of EVERY DOLLAR THEY MADE off of DD would be a good start.
[/quote]

that's not only a good start... its the law.
-DJ
Message: Posted by: Dave V (Nov 22, 2007 01:04PM)
Is it? Prove it.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but there's really nothing [i]legally[/i] wrong in what they did.
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 22, 2007 01:59PM)
I have to agree with Dave. Music copyright law has nothing in common with the laws, or lack of, governing magic.

While the fact that the two conditions for copyright infringement have been met (copying and accessibility of the original), it doesn't work that way in magic. See the myriad number of posts about it.

The two conditions that have to be met, in greater detail, are that the products have to be similar beyond a reasonable doubt and the one claiming infringement had to be published in some form. A guy, from a small town in the Midwest, sued Paul McCartney claiming he stole the guy's song and released it as "Yesterday".

Where his case fell flat, other than he was loony, was the fact that McCartney could have never heard the guy's song. It was never played anywhere and never released in any form. This is all pertaining to music though.

Magic is totally different and has never fallen into those confines. You would see a lot more lawsuits and you wouldn't be able to perform magic in public unless it was your own.
Message: Posted by: Dave V (Nov 22, 2007 02:24PM)
There are a couple of good articles (linked here before) that outline a "norms based" intellectual property protection vs. "law based" protection. Norms based IP protection not only would help magic it would also help other things like Chefs protecting their recipes from others. They too have recipes "stolen" with no legal recourse other than what their own business community provides. Same applies here.

If anyone wants to read either or both of these papers (one on magic IP protection, and the other regarding French Chefs) let me know and I'll dig up the links.
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 22, 2007 04:39PM)
Dave is right, but legal is not always right
Message: Posted by: djkuttdecks (Nov 22, 2007 05:06PM)
Honestly it depends not on the gimmick, but on the amount of copyrighted routine they taught. Even if the gimmick had a patent number, it would be well expired by now. However, the routine, and instructions in any tangible format have a copy right even if not done via library of congress. I have not seen the dvd, but if anything taught or shown is fraudulent against SD's previous material, then it "technically" has a copy right date given when first in finalized tangible product. If t11 simply took the gimmick idea and did something completely different with it, then no there is no legal obligation. This only stand as "punitive damages" when compared to previous work done by SD. Examples: lecture notes, instruction booklets, video, AND audio from video because this is his original work and the creator is still living.
-DJ
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 22, 2007 05:55PM)
DJ, as best I understand copyright - it does not cover performance works in the way we might like. Since you live with copyright and that side of the law perhaps you would clarify the legal protections for novel performance works?
Message: Posted by: Dave V (Nov 22, 2007 09:49PM)
Here are some excerpts from the paper I mentioned:

The first category of norms deals with attributing credit to innovators and inventors:
(1) The first person to publish or prominently perform a trick gets credit
for inventing it.
(2) People are encouraged to publish improvements and new versions of
previously shared work, but derivative works should acknowledge and credit the
original.

The second set of norms governs the use of a new idea once it has been created. Here, there are at least four major use norms:

(1) If a secret method or dramatic presentation has not been widely shared,
published, or sold, nobody else can use it.
(2) If a secret method has been widely shared, published, or sold, it may
be used freely.
(3) If a dramatic presentation has been widely shared, published, or sold, it
may be used, but using it will be considered bad form.
(4) If a trick was originally published or shared but has not been used for a
long time, the person who re-discovers it should be treated as if she invented it.

The third and final category of norms governs the exposure of the magic community’s secrets to the lay public:
(1) Never expose a secret to a non-magician.
(2) Never expose a secret to a non-magician.
(3) Never expose a secret to a non-magician.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 22, 2007 11:54PM)
I had posted this on the T11 forums yesterday and found the reply from Wayne Houchin (hope I spelled that correctly)this evening.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MickeyPainless
I'm sure this will be deleted as soon as someone of power reads it but I just wanted to encourage everyone interested to read the review on DD in the Dec. 07issue of Genii magazine!
Mick

Mick:

I would encourage everyone to read it as well & no, your post will not be deleted. I haven't yet read the full article from David Regal, however, I do disagree with the conclusion that is drawn.

The statement that Theory 11 sought permission from Mr Dusheck & was denied is false. It may be the case that years ago (long before Theory 11 was even conceived) BJ Bueno may have had a conversation with Steve regarding Digital Dissolve, however I do not know this for sure, and I do not know the details of what they may have discussed. When we (Theory 11) released Digital Dissolve - we all thought that it was original - it wasn't until after the release that we were told there was an issue - which is why we have suspended sales. We are fortunate enough to have some incredibly talented people on our team - why would we knowingly release something that we knew we did not have the right too? We wouldn't - we could have easily substituted one of the other projects we have lined up for Digital Dissolve.

With that said, We will do the right thing here. I can't disclose the full details yet (because they have not been fully finalized) but we have been in touch with Steve Dusheck and have reached a resolution. Needless to say, we are working as hard as we can to correct the mistakes made with Digital Dissolve & we have implemented a workflow to insure that something like this doesn't happen in the future. There's no conspiracy here, just a series of unfortunate mistakes that we are working to fix.

Anybody can make a mistake & miss something. With all the work that we put into T11 & with the number of people involved - things were quite crazy before launch. We all had an incredible workload. It's unfortunate and disappointing that we missed this, the important thing is that we convey our sincere apologies to Mr. Dusheck, and that we fix the problem. We will right this & we will make sure that it doesn't happen again in the future.
Message: Posted by: dancingm0nk3y (Nov 23, 2007 03:33AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-23 00:54, MickeyPainless wrote:
It may be the case that years ago (long before Theory 11 was even conceived) BJ Bueno may have had a conversation with Steve regarding Digital Dissolve, however I do not know this for sure, and I do not know the details of what they may have discussed. When we (Theory 11) released Digital Dissolve - we all thought that it was original - it wasn't until after the release that we were told there was an issue
[/quote]

Gee, I guess somebody's about to get hung out to dry.

Anybody else have trouble swallowing this "we all thought it was original" pill?

If the gimmick manufacturer knew about the exclusivity of the gimmick when this thing launched then how could t11 not know?
Message: Posted by: pepka (Nov 23, 2007 03:52AM)
They've reached a resolution? I wonder if they have told Steve that? I received 2 emails from him in the last 2 days and he said nothing to that effect. Of course, maybe he can't until all the proverbial ducks are in a row. I certainly hope so, I have nothing but the utmost respect for Steve, and several members of T11 as well. I want it to work, I do, but I'll believe it when I see it.
Message: Posted by: Steve Dusheck (Nov 23, 2007 08:41AM)
Two of my friends have been in contact with two people involved with Theory 11. Both have received completely different offers. Now Wayne states that no one knew I had been selling the gimmick and moves for decades and have it on my DVD. They knew enough about my gimmick to credit it at the end of the DD DVD and they also changed the dates of when I put the trick out. One of the people involved with the copy of my routine quoted a passage from my original instructions on the Genii Forum years ago so he certainly knew Bueno's handling was almost the same as mine and that bueno did not invent the gimmick. Everyone has at theory 11 different story so I don't know who to trust.
They all seem to think that it is a matter of money. Getting a royalty is not the issue. When I give people permission to make my tricks I do not ask for any royalty or payment of any kind. It is the Theory 11 DD DVD giving credit to Bueno that is the issue and they don't want to change the DVD.
I do not believe no one at theory 11 knew the gimmick and moves were mine. Since they knew enough about me to add my name to the credits they could have easily contacted me before releasing the trick.
One person involved at theory 11 stated they sold a thousand DD so far. Another person at Theory 11 claims they only sold 60 of them. So even if I only cared about royalties, as they assume, I certainly can't trust their financial statements if I expected royalties.
Copying tricks is a way of life in magic. It's not moral or ethical but it's not against the law. The majority of magic hobbyists don't care who invented the trick or who made it as long as they can buy it. MM has been doing a very good business for years. Sometimes magicians complain about them but it soon goes away and they continue to sell their versions of the tricks.
This issue will soon fade away because everyone wants a sliding shell and they will buy it from anyone. In a few weeks the gimmick will be in a box of old tricks and the hobbyists will need the next, newest trick.
That's enough for now. The issue is not resolved. But you can bet they will not keep the Bueno trick off the market.
Steve
Message: Posted by: pepka (Nov 23, 2007 09:33AM)
Well, there you go.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 23, 2007 09:39AM)
I'm not at all suprised by that!
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Nov 23, 2007 10:10AM)
[quote] we have been in touch with Steve Dusheck and have reached a resolution [/quote]

So this is pure BS. This thing just gets worse for T11.
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 23, 2007 10:50AM)
Just clearing up something. I've looked through all of the threads here and at T11 and haven't been able to find the source, but somehow Asher was credited with doing the research that provided the crediting in DD. Maybe it was first brought up on the thread that is still in clean-up.

I have talked to Lee in back-and-forth emails and while most of it is between us, I feel that one issue needs to be addressed. First, Lee says that anyone on here claiming to know him or being a friend is not speaking for him and unless he posts, whatever they say concerning him or his intentions is not to be given any weight.

I say this first because I'm about to do it, so take this how you want. Lee says that he did some research years ago concerning a different effect that was in preproduction that didn't go anywhere. He never finished his research and while some of the things he found was used in crediting DD, he has never claimed to have researched it enough to claim who created what.

I don't know Lee. I became aware of him through this issue. I just thought that this point of the discussion should be clarified.
Message: Posted by: jbayme (Nov 23, 2007 11:15AM)
Steve,

I truthfully have no idea who you spoke to, but NO ONE from my team would have EVER claimed that we have only sold 60. I am the ONLY one who has reached out to you on behalf of theory11 this past week (immediately after my post), and as requested via email, I have been in communication with Marc Desouza over the past two weeks.

We will do all we know is right to correct any inadvertent wrong done, and I assure all that as stated before, no one from my team nor I had any mal-intent nor evil plan prior with release of this item. Of course not. I knew of no issue whatsoever at the time of release. David Regal spoke to a consultant of our site on September 3rd-- 72 hours after launch of our site. I nor any of our senior creative team spoke to David via email or phone. The message to one of our consultants was long before additional research was completed and we realized the mistake made and acted on it. I was certainly not contacted for what we are doing and have done to resolve the mistake made prior to publication of the Genii Article.

We of course realize that this is entirely NOT a matter of money-- it's a matter of doing what is right and making right out of wrong done. As conveyed to Marc, we'll do anything we physically, humanly can to make things right. As conveyed previously via email, we will OF COURSE correct the crediting and attribution. We will do everything we know is right and due on every level in order to make things right. We know that was wrong was done, and mistakes were made, but this was certainly not a deliberate mistake by theory11, and we are committed to correcting it on every level.

Steve, I have sent a private email alongside this message with further information.

// j.bayme
ceo / theory11
Message: Posted by: DP the Great (Nov 23, 2007 11:16AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-21 22:20, MickeyPainless wrote:
I've been away from home on biz since Mon. and was quite happy to return and find my copy of Genii sitting on my desk!
I'm anxious to see someone from T11's response!

[/quote]

Can anyone say what was said in Genii for us who do not get it? Thanks -DP
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 23, 2007 11:24AM)
I completely agree Chad. Lee and other members of t11 speak for themselves. All of us Café "experts" just enjoy speculating... lol

Steve, if its not about royalties and they pulled the effect off the market, now what? Not trying to be rude and if you don't want us(me) prying then I won't but I cant help but wonder why you have TWO friends talking with TWO different guys at t11, hasnt there been enough confusion?

Is there a CHANCE that this was accidental? That Bueno "mis-informed" everyone else? Many of you are quick to call what Houchin was saying BS but think about it for a second...We are talking about a group of individuals who are VERY CREATIVE. Who have and will release top selling ORIGINAL material. Why would they take a chance of destroying their reputations on a SINGLE product? A product that doesn't even have their name on it! Please don't tell me "because of money", remember who we are talking about here guys. We are not talking about a 16 year old who is putting out his first and only "original" piece and will stop at nothing just to get his name out, even if it means stealing...
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 23, 2007 11:25AM)
Thanks to the birdie that filled me in on this. Here's where Asher's name got involved. It started in 2003 on the Genii forums in a U3F discussion.

http://geniimagazine.com/forum/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=10;t=000563#000066

So while he made not have researched specifically for DD, his older posts about the history is the exact ammo used by Bueno in his defense of DD. I'm not making any accusations here, just posting so people can make their own decision.

Jonathan Townsend said that he saw Bob Elliot performing it outside of Tannen's asked him whose it was and was told it was Dusheck's. Jonathan bought one right away. I personally called Bob Elliot to discuss this and unfortunately he suffers from alzheimer's and can't recall. He gave me a phone number of someone (a famous coin man) to try and get some history, but I don't feel comfortable bothering this person with this since he wasn't apart of it and would be more second-hand info.

DeSouza stated that Karl Fulves had recanted his position when pressed on it. I'll send him a pm and see if that was in print anywhere.
Message: Posted by: David Regal (Nov 23, 2007 11:46AM)
There is no one less interested in giving negative feedback than myself (as I did in my Genii review) or in having people mad at me (I don't wake up seeking enemies), or in joining this thread, as I'm doing now, but as J. Bayme has brought my name into this, as did Wayne Houchin, I have no alternative.

I emailed Theory 11 as soon as I became aware of the potential problem, using their on-site communication tool. The response I received said, among other things:

"I’m writing on behalf of Jonathan Bayme and BJ Bueno..."

And there we are. I do not want it implied that I did no due diligence. It is not my job to be anyone's PR department. If Theory 11 wanted me to know that they were taking steps to rectify a problem, they certainly knew who to call. Furthermore, by sending a series of follow-up emails I feel I both communicated clearly and gave Theory 11 every opportunity to alter its stance.

I really do want the best for Theory 11. Sites that excite interest in magic and continue to bring people in are what magic needs. I will enthusiastically review strong products that they release. But in this particular case I feel that the proper response from Theory 11 should be something along the lines of "Boy, we really f-ed up on this one. What a bad way to launch a company. Sorry, we'll recitfy this and work extra hard to earn your trust and respect."
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 23, 2007 11:52AM)
Does anyone have a Dusheck catalog from 1965? I know this is probably extremely rare, but some collector probably has it. PM me if you don't want to post here. Thanks.

Thanks for posting David.
Message: Posted by: jbayme (Nov 23, 2007 12:02PM)
David,

I appreciate your reply, but please understand that the response you suggested was exactly what I have posted. As soon as additional research was completed and I realized wrong was done, we acted on it and suspended sale of the product. We messed up. We made a mistake. We did wrong. And I have and do apologize profusely for it. The product is currently suspended from sale on the site, and it will be until we resolve the matter entirely and to the complete satisfaction of Steve.

As requested by Steve, I have been in direct communication with Marc Desouza, and I hope to reach resolution and make right for wrong done on every single level. I myself did not write or respond to any message sent to you previously on this matter, and as your message to us was dated September 3rd (3 days after launch), I especially was not aware at the time of the extent of our mistake. I apologize.

Please do not think for a moment that I hold any negative regard towards you, or anyone at all that has posted professionally about this issue-- as that attention is what brought the mistake to light and in turn has enabled us to work to resolve mistakes made on every level we possibly can.

// j.bayme
ceo / theory11
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 23, 2007 12:07PM)
Any info if Bueno is going to stay a part of T11 and if he is going to issue any form a retraction for the comments, regarding Dusheck, made on the T11 boards?
Message: Posted by: W:H (Nov 23, 2007 12:26PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-23 12:24, Hart Keene wrote:
I completely agree Chad. Lee and other members of t11 speak for themselves. All of us Café "experts" just enjoy speculating... lol

Steve, if its not about royalties and they pulled the effect off the market, now what? Not trying to be rude and if you don't want us(me) prying then I won't but I cant help but wonder why you have TWO friends talking with TWO different guys at t11, hasnt there been enough confusion?

Is there a CHANCE that this was accidental? That Bueno "mis-informed" everyone else? Many of you are quick to call what Houchin was saying BS but think about it for a second...We are talking about a group of individuals who are VERY CREATIVE. Who have and will release top selling ORIGINAL material. Why would they take a chance of destroying their reputations on a SINGLE product? A product that doesn't even have their name on it! Please don't tell me "because of money", remember who we are talking about here guys. We are not talking about a 16 year old who is putting out his first and only "original" piece and will stop at nothing just to get his name out, even if it means stealing...
[/quote]

Good post. Thank you. I think that we can all accept that T11 made a mistake in releasing Digital Dissolve without speaking with Mr. Dusheck first. The two matters that remain are:

A) What is Theory 11 doing to fix the mistake?
B) Did Theory 11 KNOWINGLY make the mistake?

First - What is T11 doing to fix the mistake? We have currently suspended all sales of the product & have spent the last several weeks attempting to resolve the matter directly with Mr. Dusheck. We have been unable to speak to Mr. Dusheck directly as he has asked his friends to speak to us for him. Every bit of progress that we have made has been met with a post from Steve on these forums that has pushed us backwards. I am confused by his most recent post:

"Getting a royalty is not the issue. When I give people permission to make my tricks I do not ask for any royalty or payment of any kind. It is the Theory 11 DD DVD giving credit to Bueno that is the issue and they don't want to change the DVD. "

Our central offer was to COMPLETELY change the title, packaging, and editing of Digital Dissolve to properly reflect the history of the effect. We want to change everything and we have let Mr. Dusheck know that.

We have also offered a retroactive royalty going back to the first DVD sold. But beyond that, we have made it clear that we made a mistake, we acknowledge that, we apologize for any harm done, and we are willing to do whatever Mr. Dusheck wants us to do regarding the matter. We have already suspended sales & if Steve would like us to drop the product completely, we are absolutely willing to do so. It would be a shame to take such a wonderful piece of magic away from the community - which is why we have been trying to reach a resolution directly with Mr. Dusheck. As steve posted himself:

"I can honestly say the DVD and routines are very good... There is a move by Lee Asher that is very good and also practical. That deserves high praise."

There is value in the product & there are some great variations & handlings of Steve's original routine. The issue at the heart of the matter (as expressed by Mr. Dusheck himself) is the titling & crediting of the full routine. Indeed it is not a full BJ Bueno original effect - BJ has a great VARIATION of Steve Dusheck's original effect. We have made it clear that we are willing to change the edit, packaging of the DVD, credits and all promotion to reflect the truth - as well as paying a retroactive royalty.

That is where we are at with respect to working on fixing the mistake. Now let's to address the REPEATED claim that we must have done this on purpose. We have already admitted & accepted that a mistake was made. Did T11 do it on purpose?

I would like to point out again, that we have a team of incredibly creative guys. All of us are artists within the community. We all know EXACTLY what it feels like to be taken advantage of as an artist. That feeling was one of the driving forces behind the creation of T11. Why would this group of people knowingly publish an effect that was mis-titled & mis-credited instead of putting out an alternate effect? It certainly isn't the case that we were short on material to pick from.

Many have mentioned the incredible price for Digital Dissolve - including the gimmicks. Those of you who know Jaime Schoolcraft & are familiar with his work - know that it is TOP NOTCH... and not cheap. T11 is making VERY little profit on Digital Dissolve. There is a reason why similar gimmicks are selling for 3-4 times the price with NO DVD. So if T11 released a mis-titled & credited Digital Dissolve ON PURPOSE - based on the selling price, it couldn't have been for the cash... If you accept that T11 knowingly & maliciously did this, you have to accept that we did so for no other reason than to harm Mr. Dusheck.

We are artists. We are passionate about magic. At the launch of our baby - a new online entity, why would we release a project for the sole purpose of hurting Mr. Dusheck? We wouldn't. This was an unfortunate mistake & one that we have been trying to fix. It is VERY important to us that we do resolve this - regardless of "how" it is resolved. We are artists, we read the forums & the magazines, we love magic & the accusations that have been leveled at us hurt. It is hard for me personally to believe that there are those out there who honestly think that we did this on purpose.

I would like to ask Mr Dusheck: please speak with us personally so that we can end this. Mr. Keene is right when he asks, "hasn't there been enough confusion?" Let's end this. As we have repeatedly stated, we are willing to do whatever is necessary to right the situation. Please speak with us directly so we can figure out what that is.

Peace,

Wayne Houchin
Message: Posted by: W:H (Nov 23, 2007 12:42PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-23 12:46, David Regal wrote:
I really do want the best for Theory 11. Sites that excite interest in magic and continue to bring people in are what magic needs. I will enthusiastically review strong products that they release. But in this particular case I feel that the proper response from Theory 11 should be something along the lines of "Boy, we really f-ed up on this one. What a bad way to launch a company. Sorry, we'll recitfy this and work extra hard to earn your trust and respect."
[/quote]

Those are exactly our sentiments - I hope that we have been able to communicate that effectively in the past several weeks. Through a series of unfortunate mistakes, some misunderstandings, and I'm sure some miscommunication, we made a mistake. I was personally shocked when I read your article - I never knew that you had contacted us. Somewhere along the path, a lot of information & good advice got lost. We are sorry & we will right this. Furthermore we have put in place a system to make certain that we do not make this mistake in the future.

I think what's important here is that we are willing to right this. We are willing to admit that a mistake has been made & we are willing to put into place a system to make sure this doesn't happen again. Not only that, but as soon as we had confirmation that we were in the wrong - we immediately pulled the product. We are now willing to resolve the matter with Mr. Dusheck in whatever way he feels appropriate. The ethics within our community are of the upmost importance to us & I hope that we can continue to demonstrate that to all of you.

Wayne Houchin
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 23, 2007 12:51PM)
The thing I have to wonder about is why Steve would have his friends consult with theory 11 yet comes here personally to publically tear into them...
Message: Posted by: Steve Dusheck (Nov 23, 2007 01:55PM)
Hart, I cannot talk directly with the people from theory 11 because I am sick and must take a lot of medication. I cannot take any stress. People only want to talk on the phone when they don't want to put anything in writing.
I know more about all the hype going on than you do. You are only concerned about the reputations of a few of your theory 11 friends. You were not concerned about my reputation when you stated "you heard" I was difficult to do business with. When asked you didn't provide any names. You always have remarks such as "I am not sure if that will please Steve D." and saying that "DD should be removed from the market because it will leave a bad taste in the mouths of many magicians."
I am very sick and only write on the magic Café when I take one of the pills I must take 4 times a day to keep calm.
I did not ask my friends to talk with Theory 11 for me. One of them did it on his own because he felt it was important and he wanted to help me. The other, I did not want to mention but Jonathan did, discussed the problem on my behalf on his own also because he knows Jonathan and most of the people involved with theory 11.
Both of the magicians who tried to help me, on their own, are people I know and trust. I did not make up the sales figures of 1,000 sets and 60 sets. That is what I was told by the two magicians trying to help me.
If you are so concerned about the reputations of specific Theory 11 magicians give us their names, Hart, and I will tell you if they had an active part in putting out my effect and changing the time line in the DVD credits.
You know nothing about me or my business ethics or even all the original tricks I marketed yet you keep trying to find faults with me.
The theory 11 DVD will still have everyone on it giving full credit to Bueno when the gimmick and the major moves are mine.
The apologies will be the standard we didn't know it was yours. No one had any idea that I had anything to do with the trick but they knew enough to include my name in the credits in such a way as to make my input seemed minor at most.
You have never invented any top selling magic tricks, Hart, and you know nothing about the magic business. Your only contributions concern your idols at Theory 11. Your comments on the Café have done more harm to the Theory 11 image than anything anyone else has written.
The Bueno modifications are minor and do not justify Theory 11 putting out my gimmick along with the DVD giving Bueno all the credit. They refused to give me any credit orally on the DVD.
Why didn't Bueno perform his trick on the DVD? If he is taking all the credit why did they have to hire a professional magician?
I am upset because two different people at Theory 11 made two different offers and presented two different solutions yet Jonathan didn't know about the other offer. Wayne said he has the utmost respect for me but no one at Theory 11 contacted me about the DD project. They would have seen how generous I am and not had to pay Bueno for his rehash of my trick.
I don't know what all your motives are for always commenting about me Hart but you certainly make me dislike all the creative people at Theory 11 just knowing they are your friends.
I have a bad heart problem. I'm sick and only considered taking the royalty if it would continue to be given to my family if I die. But having the credit taken from me and all the lies being told about me makes it difficult to trust them. I know not everyone at Theory 11 is unaware of my C/S Transpo as they claim. So tell me who your buddies at theory 11 are Hart and I'll fill you in.
Jonathan, you know Marc is my friend and he is better qualified to talk with you at this time than I am. You said you could not make the simple change at the end of the DVD that I requested but somehow you could include my C/S Transpo routine to the end of that same DVD.
As someone here recently said you did nothing illegal. It was just a mean thing to do to someone. I never did anything to anyone involved with Theory 11 to be treated as you have treated me. Didin't you read any of Bueno's comments on your site? I'm very sorry you didn't come to me earlier. After forty years I have a lot of additional routines with my gimmick. You only have one version on your DVD and it's for performing for 2 or 3 people directly in front of you.
Steve
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 23, 2007 01:57PM)
Hart,
I don't think that Steve HAS torn into T11 and as was posted earlier he even praised some of the work! As for why he has someone else handling the negotiations, I might assume it is for the same reason someone uses an attorney as a representative in legal matters! I know that in my own business dealings I often use a 2nd party for this very reason so as not to become emotionally involved!
Mick
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 23, 2007 01:58PM)
LOL, Steve was quicker on the draw in response!
Message: Posted by: W:H (Nov 23, 2007 02:32PM)
I am almost at a loss for words.

"People only want to talk on the phone when they don't want to put anything in writing." - Steve Dusheck

>> We have repeatedly written, including e/mails, PM's, and a hand-written letter. Both to you and to your friends whom tell us that you personally have asked them to speak on your behalf.

"The theory 11 DVD will still have everyone on it giving full credit to Bueno when the gimmick and the major moves are mine." - Steve Dusheck

>> I will state again: We are absolutely willing to re-edit the DVD to reflect the proper history.

"The apologies will be the standard we didn't know it was yours. No one had any idea that I had anything to do with the trick but they knew enough to include my name in the credits in such a way as to make my input seemed minor at most. "

>> Our apologies may seem standard to you, however, they are sincere. There was not a conscious attempt to make your input seem minor - there was simply ignorance on our part. For that we apologies & will do whatever it takes to right the situation.

"The Bueno modifications are minor and do not justify Theory 11 putting out my gimmick along with the DVD giving Bueno all the credit. They refused to give me any credit orally on the DVD." - Steve Dusheck

>> You are 100% correct. The modifications do not justify that. Once it was clear that we had made a mistake, we pulled the product. Furthermore, we did not REFUSE to give you any credit orally, rather, it was not known to us that we needed to. Again, ignorance - for that we are sorry & we are willing to correct the wrong.

"Why didn't Bueno perform his trick on the DVD? If he is taking all the credit why did they have to hire a professional magician? " - Steve Dusheck

>> ?

"I am upset because two different people at Theory 11 made two different offers and presented two different solutions yet Jonathan didn't know about the other offer." - Steve Dusheck

>> Jonathan is the only person who has made any official offer. We are not aware of a 2nd offer. Who spoke to you about this?

"Wayne said he has the utmost respect for me but no one at Theory 11 contacted me about the DD project. They would have seen how generous I am and not had to pay Bueno for his rehash of my trick." - Steve Dusheck

>> I'm sure that we would have seen how generous you are. You have been more than generous throughout your career, the magic community owes you a great deal. We absolutely would have and should have contacted you. We were not aware - again this is completely our fault, for which we accept complete responsibility. We thought that we had all the info / history of the Digital Dissolve - we were wrong. Again, we have implemented a system of checks and balances within T11 to ensure that we do not make this mistake again.

"But having the credit taken from me and all the lies being told about me makes it difficult to trust them." - Steve Dusheck

>> We did not knowingly take the credit from you - again we apologize for not doing enough homework. What lies have we told about you?

"As someone here recently said you did nothing illegal. It was just a mean thing to do to someone. I never did anything to anyone involved with Theory 11 to be treated as you have treated me." - Steve Dusheck

>> Steve, we are all sorry. This was not personal. We all know that you have not done anything to anyone involved with T11 & we apologize for the entire situation. I'm sorry that you feel you have been mis-treated. This is certainly not what we want - how can we fix the situation?

"Jonathan, you know Marc is my friend and he is better qualified to talk with you at this time than I am. You said you could not make the simple change at the end of the DVD that I requested but somehow you could include my C/S Transpo routine to the end of that same DVD." - Steve Dusheck

>> Again, we absolutely can and will change the edit of the DVD to reflect the truth. We are aware of the offer you made to us to include your original routine as well as additional handling. As we have said before, that is very generous of you & of course we are thrilled. In fact, up until reading your earlier post today, I was under the impression that we had reached a resolution. Why the change in opinion toward us?

Steve, I hope you realize that we do have the upmost respect for you. This was not personal, but was an unfortunate mistake. You are right when you state that it is commonplace within our community for magicians to rip other magicians off, however, that IS NOT what we do. I suspect that T11 and yourself have a lot more in common than you might think. We are ON YOUR SIDE here. We did make a mistake and we want to make it right. We are not defending our mistake we are simply searching for a solution that will make it up to you - as well as set things right within the community. T11 was founded as a place by the artists for the artists. It is disappointing that this mistake was made - but we have learned from it. What can we do to make this up to you?

Wayne Houchin
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 23, 2007 02:34PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-23 14:55, Steve Dusheck wrote:
Hart, I cannot talk directly with the people from theory 11 because I am sick and must take a lot of medication. I cannot take any stress. People only want to talk on the phone when they don't want to put anything in writing.
I know more about all the hype going on than you do. You are only concerned about the reputations of a few of your theory 11 friends. You were not concerned about my reputation when you stated "you heard" I was difficult to do business with. When asked you didn't provide any names. You always have remarks such as "I am not sure if that will please Steve D." and saying that "DD should be removed from the market because it will leave a bad taste in the mouths of many magicians."
I am very sick and only write on the magic Café when I take one of the pills I must take 4 times a day to keep calm.
I did not ask my friends to talk with Theory 11 for me. One of them did it on his own because he felt it was important and he wanted to help me. The other, I did not want to mention but Jonathan did, discussed the problem on my behalf on his own also because he knows Jonathan and most of the people involved with theory 11.
Both of the magicians who tried to help me, on their own, are people I know and trust. I did not make up the sales figures of 1,000 sets and 60 sets. That is what I was told by the two magicians trying to help me.
If you are so concerned about the reputations of specific Theory 11 magicians give us their names, Hart, and I will tell you if they had an active part in putting out my effect and changing the time line in the DVD credits.
You know nothing about me or my business ethics or even all the original tricks I marketed yet you keep trying to find faults with me.
The theory 11 DVD will still have everyone on it giving full credit to Bueno when the gimmick and the major moves are mine.
The apologies will be the standard we didn't know it was yours. No one had any idea that I had anything to do with the trick but they knew enough to include my name in the credits in such a way as to make my input seemed minor at most.
You have never invented any top selling magic tricks, Hart, and you know nothing about the magic business. Your only contributions concern your idols at Theory 11. Your comments on the Café have done more harm to the Theory 11 image than anything anyone else has written.
The Bueno modifications are minor and do not justify Theory 11 putting out my gimmick along with the DVD giving Bueno all the credit. They refused to give me any credit orally on the DVD.
Why didn't Bueno perform his trick on the DVD? If he is taking all the credit why did they have to hire a professional magician?
I am upset because two different people at Theory 11 made two different offers and presented two different solutions yet Jonathan didn't know about the other offer. Wayne said he has the utmost respect for me but no one at Theory 11 contacted me about the DD project. They would have seen how generous I am and not had to pay Bueno for his rehash of my trick.
I don't know what all your motives are for always commenting about me Hart but you certainly make me dislike all the creative people at Theory 11 just knowing they are your friends.
I have a bad heart problem. I'm sick and only considered taking the royalty if it would continue to be given to my family if I die. But having the credit taken from me and all the lies being told about me makes it difficult to trust them. I know not everyone at Theory 11 is unaware of my C/S Transpo as they claim. So tell me who your buddies at theory 11 are Hart and I'll fill you in.
Jonathan, you know Marc is my friend and he is better qualified to talk with you at this time than I am. You said you could not make the simple change at the end of the DVD that I requested but somehow you could include my C/S Transpo routine to the end of that same DVD.
As someone here recently said you did nothing illegal. It was just a mean thing to do to someone. I never did anything to anyone involved with Theory 11 to be treated as you have treated me. Didin't you read any of Bueno's comments on your site? I'm very sorry you didn't come to me earlier. After forty years I have a lot of additional routines with my gimmick. You only have one version on your DVD and it's for performing for 2 or 3 people directly in front of you.
Steve
[/quote]

Steve, I stand by my earlier post that the guys at theory 11 are very creative individuals who have and will put out many more ORIGINAL creations. I don't believe they needed your effect to make theory 11 successfull. Like they have said, they made a mistake and are trying the best they can to fix it. I think there was a serious mis-understanding between the group prior to the release of this effect but do you really feel that they INTENTIONALLY did this to hurt you? I just have a hard time swallowing that with their track records. Was there really that much to gain as opposed to what would be lossed by intentionally releasing your effect? Think about it...

Steve, the reason I am on here is because they are being made to look like total villains and everyone was jumping in on the gangbang. I just didn't feel the same way so I spoke up. Take a look at my post count Steve, I am certainly not a "new" Café member who decided to join just to jump in on this fiasco. I don't even know most of the guys on theory 11.

I do apologize for making the "difficult to deal with" comment a while back. Please know that the comment was not made by a member of theory 11. Since you keep bringing it up I will tell you that it was from a fellow Café member(who will remain nameless) who contacted you and wanted to pay you because he had purchased DD and felt bad. He had wanted to meet up with you briefly and was willing to pay you for your time as well. He said that your response was less than friendly. I assume it was during the beginning of this whole fiasco and when you were having the health problems. That being said it is totally understandable seeing that you were under a lot of stress. So that is where the comment came from, just so you know...

I kind of resent the way your post was directed at me. I know as much as anybody else here, just because my posts don't favor you completely doesn't mean you need to single me out as "not knowing anything". I have just as much right to post my thoughts here as the next guy.
Message: Posted by: evolve629 (Nov 23, 2007 04:53PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-23 15:32, W:H wrote:
>>

>> Steve, I hope you realize that we do have the upmost respect for you. This was not personal, but was an unfortunate mistake. You are right when you state that it is commonplace within our community for magicians to rip other magicians off, however, that IS NOT what we do. I suspect that T11 and yourself have a lot more in common than you might think. We are ON YOUR SIDE here. We did make a mistake and we want to make it right. We are not defending our mistake we are simply searching for a solution that will make it up to you - as well as set things right within the community. T11 was founded as a place by the artists for the artists. It is disappointing that this mistake was made - but we have learned from it. What can we do to make this up to you?

Wayne Houchin
[/quote]
I really don't know what more is needed to ractify this; but Wayne and Theory 11 have done the right thing. I, for one, will continue both Steve's and Theroy 11's work as I have conviction in both!
Message: Posted by: RCP (Nov 23, 2007 05:25PM)
I hope the offers to rectify the wrongs are sincere. Until Steve Dusheck is satisfied that the wrong has been righted I will continue my boycott of Theory 11 and everyone associated. I will not be silent about it either and will make sure everyone I come across knows about it as well.
Message: Posted by: vinsmagic (Nov 23, 2007 07:27PM)
Not only should everyne involved with theory 11 credit Steve but pay him his royality rights......
this is Steves effectand his gimmick.over the years many of Steves effects have been ripped off , but this is the last straw....
Steve has been creating magic before some of you young hot shots on theory 11 were born.....
the godfather
Message: Posted by: djkuttdecks (Nov 24, 2007 01:35AM)
I will be the first to tell you that personally I am NOT a T11 fan. I find most of their practices to have lack of ethics. I will not purchase anything from them and have been disappointed in them as a company as a whole. However, this opinion was formed the day it launched, and is only "re-enforced" by the ethics of DD. I also am mature enough to know that sometimes money and the love of it is successful in this life span and companies driven solely by its profit are not soon to fade (so t11 ain't giving up with a fight). However, in the case of DD... it's becoming a myriad of he said she said posts. So, here is where the rubber meets the road. Ethically speaking, "IF" T11 is telling the truth, and for some unbelievable reason SD just won't talk to them or whatever, then T11 is (in my ethical opinion) obligated to discontinue production of the product indefinitely and return royalties to SD that match if not surpass those in agreement to BJ when contracted for the DD project. After which consider the subject finished and there can be no more punitive damages. "IF" SD is speaking the truth (which given past records in comparison is most likely) T11 should man up and communicate properly to SD in a professional manner until an agreement is made about the release of the product under the T11 roof. Personally, I hope SD does not give them permission and the sales are discontinued... some times lessons learned the hard way are most valuable with creating ethical code in a fledgling company.

In the end, it comes down to this... it is really none of my business who IS or ISN'T telling the truth. The product is currently not available and the agreement between SD and T11 is NONE of my concern. If one day I see that DD is being released, I just want to know that SD gave the OK happy and willingly. I do not need to know his compensation and the details of the agreement, I only need to know that the proper creator of the effect agreed. If it doesn't release then I can only assume an agreement was never met and that's fine too... past is the past and we move on.

I understand that the young bright rock stars of t11 feel compelled to "fix" the situation by coming on and explaining their side. It must be hard to convince grown ups with mortgages that you can properly, ethically, and profitably run a business (in a monkE sEE monkE do sort of way), instead of the multi-billion dollar cash cow known as American youth, who see them as idols and have fist fulls of mommy and daddy's guilt money to blow. It's tough eh? So... lesson learned, welcome to the kitchen. At this point I do not expect to see the return of "DD" with "BJ" from "T11" until "SD" gives the "OK" to "WH" and "JB".
-"DJ" :)
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 24, 2007 02:41AM)
I think too many emails and pm's are the problem, send more real letters, and less emails so the man can gather the right things together
Message: Posted by: Crimson-Death (Nov 24, 2007 07:37AM)
I do not think, after all of this, that Theory11 as a whole purposely ripped off Mr Dusheck's orignal trick. It was not money nor the want of fame, but I think it was just the arrogance of one or two people who just did not want to believe who originated the gimmick in question, as it was stated by those one or two people in other forums. The evidence is there, enough as it is, for all to make up their minds.
No hearsay evidence here, all straight from the horse's mouth instead.

Lack of proper communication among all the parties involved only exacerbate the problem, both in creating it and trying to solve it. But the intention to fix it is there so let us see how this ends...
Message: Posted by: Mb217 (Nov 24, 2007 12:17PM)
Well, truthfully the BS continues, different chapter but clearly the same book. I think it's been conclusively proven that T11 is a culprit. They made a "mistake" in the same way prison fulls of inmates have made mistakes. And you know, if you ask any inmate if he's guilty, well of course he isn't for any reason...:D

Those that supported T11 were clearly wrong as some of them posted here in response to David Regal's review of the matter. They still take some exception with all this, probable stubborness and the sting of just backing something foul they believed so much in. Like a mom believing in her son, then finding out he's the neighborhood drug dealer. She's mad and upset, but that's still her son and she decides to stick by him no matter what as best she can...Some of that is happening here.

Hey Hart man, I believe in your right to your opinion, but again I ask you to personalize this somewhat...If all of this had happened to your dad or grandfather at such a point, would it be OK for such disrespect and tone to be allowed? I think you'd stand up forcefully for your grandfather on this, especially if he's in the right. Right??? But better yet, whether it's your family or not, why not just do the right thing by people? I think Steve Dusheck has been consistent here, honest and forthright...I think all that has been proven. He is guilty of nothing. T11 is certainly guilty of all of what started this string from the very beginning and it's been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Like I first said on all this quite a while back when helping to mount the charge and attack, this was about arrogance from a bunch of young ruffians...a street corner gang moving in to a new neighborhood (these guys aren't really tough, but you know what I mean here). Basically they tried to take-off an old man and he happen to fight them back in the alleyways. Some of us heard his faint voice here and gave pursuit, caught these guys at a dead-end and held them responsible. We chased them all because they all ran and were of the same hole, wore the same colors proudly. I don't say that all involved with T11 aren't creative thinkers etc., but that's not the point of all this, and if this were in a court of law those points wouldn't matter. Just like it didn't matter how great a bird doctor the Bird Man of Alcatraz was while he was doing his time for what he was doing it for - Irrelevent.

I don't think Steve expects any great windfall from catching up with this particular confidence game and gang. But everyone is sorry when you catch them, no one ever meant to do what you catch them doing. And if you don't catch them, then it don't matter. But they were caught and made to answer for their trespasses, that appear to have been intentional to some degree. And BJ is not alone in the blame, as he did not do all of this by himself...it passed through several gates opened and then reinforced by others. Then protected by mouthpieces and assortments of friends of the family...a real syndicate.

Anyway, I think it should be respected that of Steve's illness at this time. I think his reputation should be protected because it has been found to be absolutely legit. If you really knew of this guy, you'd know he is an amazing creator of magic, been doing it longer then many have been alive or could walk and talk around here. He has done nothing but added greatly to this art form. He certainly deserves better than he got in so many ways here.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 24, 2007 12:55PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 13:17, Mb217 wrote:
Well, truthfully the BS continues, different chapter but clearly the same book. I think it's been conclusively proven that T11 is a culprit. They made a "mistake" in the same way prison fulls of inmates have made mistakes. And you know, if you ask any inmate if he's guilty, well of course he isn't for any reason...:D

Those that supported T11 were clearly wrong as some of them posted here in response to David Regal's review of the matter. They still take some exception with all this, probable stubborness and the sting of just backing something foul they believed so much in. Like a mom believing in her son, then finding out he's the neighborhood drug dealer. She's mad and upset, but that's still her son and she decides to stick by him no matter what as best she can...Some of that is happening here.

Hey Hart man, I believe in your right to your opinion, but again I ask you to personalize this somewhat...If all of this had happened to your dad or grandfather at such a point, would it be OK for such disrespect and tone to be allowed? I think you'd stand up forcefully for your grandfather on this, especially if he's in the right. Right??? But better yet, whether it's your family or not, why not just do the right thing by people? I think Steve Dusheck has been consistent here, honest and forthright...I think all that has been proven. He is guilty of nothing. T11 is certainly guilty of all of what started this string from the very beginning and it's been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Like I first said on all this quite a while back when helping to mount the charge and attack, this was about arrogance from a bunch of young ruffians...a street corner gang moving in to a new neighborhood (these guys aren't really tough, but you know what I mean here). Basically they tried to take-off an old man and he happen to fight them back in the alleyways. Some of us heard his faint voice here and gave pursuit, caught these guys at a dead-end and held them responsible. We chased them all because they all ran and were of the same hole, wore the same colors proudly. I don't say that all involved with T11 aren't creative thinkers etc., but that's not the point of all this, and if this were in a court of law those points wouldn't matter. Just like it didn't matter how great a bird doctor the Bird Man of Alcatraz was while he was doing his time for what he was doing it for - Irrelevent.

I don't think Steve expects any great windfall from catching up with this particular confidence game and gang. But everyone is sorry when you catch them, no one ever meant to do what you catch them doing. And if you don't catch them, then it don't matter. But they were caught and made to answer for their trespasses, that appear to have been intentional to some degree. And BJ is not alone in the blame, as he did not do all of this by himself...it passed through several gates opened and then reinforced by others. Then protected by mouthpieces and assortments of friends of the family...a real syndicate.

Anyway, I think it should be respected that of Steve's illness at this time. I think his reputation should be protected because it has been found to be absolutely legit. If you really knew of this guy, you'd know he is an amazing creator of magic, been doing it longer then many have been alive or could walk and talk around here. He has done nothing but added greatly to this art form. He certainly deserves better than he got in so many ways here.
[/quote]

Mb, you like to use a lot of analogies in your posts. I think most will agree they are pretty outrageous...but to each their own. Remember at the end of the day we are talking about a *** coin trick.
Message: Posted by: dancingm0nk3y (Nov 24, 2007 12:57PM)
I still don't see how they can claim ignorance when they credited Steve Duscheck on the DVD. If they knew of his involvement with the gaff, but didn't bother to check what routines he used it in then this seems like negligence to the point of unscrupulousness.

On another note, I am glad that at least one of the artists from T11 came here to comment (thank you Wayne Houchin). T11 was launched on the faces and REPUTATIONS of the artists involved. I gave them the benefit of the doubt because of the names involved. Now I feel like I've been duped and lied to by some of my magic heroes.

Clay
Message: Posted by: RCP (Nov 24, 2007 01:22PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 13:55, Hart Keene wrote:

Mb, you like to use a lot of analogies in your posts. I think most will agree they are pretty outrageous...but to each their own. Remember at the end of the day we are talking about a *** coin trick.
[/quote]

No Hart at the end of the day it’s much, much more than just a coin trick. I recognize you’re a young man and as such lack the life experiences to understand what people are talking about and defending.

At the end of the day it’s about honor, truth, right from wrong, credit for a life time of achievement, giving without asking for anything in return and just plan old common courtesy.

One day you will understand these things if your lucky, or perhaps you will just be the poorer for never having those experiences and the friendships that come with them.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 24, 2007 01:31PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 14:22, RCP wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 13:55, Hart Keene wrote:

Mb, you like to use a lot of analogies in your posts. I think most will agree they are pretty outrageous...but to each their own. Remember at the end of the day we are talking about a *** coin trick.
[/quote]

No Hart at the end of the day it’s much, much more than just a coin trick. I recognize you’re a young man and as such lack the life experiences to understand what people are talking about and defending.

At the end of the day it’s about honor, truth, right from wrong, credit for a life time of achievement, giving without asking for anything in return and just plan old common courtesy.

One day you will understand these things if your lucky, or perhaps you will just be the poorer for never having those experiences and the friendships that come with them.
[/quote]

Cmon RCP, you know what I meant. He is using some ridiculous analogies on his previous post and on others. I just meant they are far fetched, not trivializing what we are talking about. Please don't try to talk down to me, OK?
Message: Posted by: RCP (Nov 24, 2007 01:45PM)
Not talking down to you. It is obvious that there are two groups of people having trouble understanding each other. Mostly it's a younger vs. an older division that's based on life experiences and friendships. I don't blame you or others who simply don't understand what Steve is feeling about all of this. No offense ment, but it is much more than whether somebody gets another trick. I wish I could express it better so everyone that does not understand could.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 24, 2007 02:09PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 14:45, RCP wrote:
Not talking down to you. It is obvious that there are two groups of people having trouble understanding each other. Mostly it's a younger vs. an older division that's based on life experiences and friendships. I don't blame you or others who simply don't understand what Steve is feeling about all of this. No offense ment, but it is much more than whether somebody gets another trick. I wish I could express it better so everyone that does not understand could.
[/quote]

So the guys in question have never had anything stolen from them? Are you not familiar with what Lee Asher sacrificed to battle magic makers?

I have had a lot of stuff stolen from me in my life.

I don't know what you are trying to get across RCP. I admit that theory 11 made a mistake, and so did they. I have a problem with you and others making them villains, like they intentionally stole from a sick old man. I just won't buy that, not with the evidence that has been provided. Show me some motive? Show me that they needed an old published coin trick to be profitable and survive as a new company? Show me that they had run out of creative ideas that they just HAD to resort to stealing? Prove to me that they are the criminal minds you all make them out to be? None of you can prove that this was not an honest mistake or just the "mis-guidance" of one or two t11 members.

Furthermore, Steve D has accused them of not trying to contact him. But he admittedly wont be in contact with them, and has his friends contact them and consult? It doesn't make any sense. Not trying to be rude and this certainly isn't a jab at Steve but he has admitted multiple times that he is on some serious meds, I just want to be sure we are getting all the facts straight.
Message: Posted by: joejonesonline (Nov 24, 2007 02:12PM)
I'll go out on a limb here and agree that comparing them (Theory11 artists/executives) to a bunch of prisoners is probably over the top.

I think there are two possible explanations for this whole mess. They either did it intentionally or they were really negligent. Neither is good, but one is less morally cupable than the other.

It really doesn't make sense for them to have done this intentionally. It is so obvious that a ripoff would be found out! Youngish professionals with any sort of internet background like these guys know that the magic community is just too aggressive, too close-knit, and too educated to let someone market a knock-off effect without this kind of public backlash.

Put it this way. I'm no professional and I know that! Even a "Joe Jones" like me can figure out in 10 minutes whether a marketed effect is original or a ripoff or improperly credited. Often times this wonderful community lets it known in the title of a post. And if I - a magic dummy - can figure it out, anyone can figure it out.

Don't get me wrong. Negligence isn't excusable and should be harshly condemned. No doubt that they screwed up and should be held accountable. I earlier advocated apology, royalties, and repackaging. (And if Mr. Dusheck wants more, he should get more.) And, definiately, some of this smells really rotten - and most of them were definiately on notice of Mr. Dusheck's effect (see, eg, the Genii forum archive above). And the extremely long investigatory period after this became really public is also fishy.

But I just don't buy the idea of malice. Malice just doesn't make sense or dollars and cents.

A final thought. I just don't want to buy malice either. That would be heartless and cruel. And that's not the type of magic community I want to really exist.

Many prayers are with you Mr. Dusheck.

Joe Jones
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 24, 2007 02:20PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 15:12, joejonesonline wrote:
It really doesn't make sense for them to have done this intentionally. It is so obvious that a ripoff would be found out! Youngish professionals with any sort of internet background like these guys know that the magic community is just too aggressive, too close-knit, and too educated to let someone market a knock-off effect without this kind of public backlash.


Joe Jones
[/quote]

Please re-read this a few times and remember the guys we are talking about here...

Great post.
Message: Posted by: djkuttdecks (Nov 24, 2007 02:36PM)
Hart... I understand what you are saying, but let us not forget that T11 in itself is actually a rip off of someone else's idea! They knowingly ripped off Ellusionist, Wayne did so and never even told them he was leaving until it launched. What makes you think that T11's core 2 or 3 creators have ANY integrity and wouldn't "knowingly" rip off someone... its how they launched. I don't recall hearing about SD doing something like this in the past, so who do I believe? derrrr SD.
-DJ
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 24, 2007 02:43PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 15:36, djkuttdecks wrote:
Hart... I understand what you are saying, but let us not forget that T11 in itself is actually a rip off of someone else's idea! They knowingly ripped off Ellusionist, Wayne did so and never even told them he was leaving until it launched. What makes you think that T11's core 2 or 3 creators have ANY integrity and wouldn't "knowingly" rip off someone... its how they launched. I don't recall hearing about SD doing something like this in the past, so who do I believe? derrrr SD.
-DJ
[/quote]

So you have some facts to back up these accusations? Also, please explain how they ripped off Ellusionist...
Message: Posted by: W:H (Nov 24, 2007 02:47PM)
DJ:

You do not have the full facts regarding myself & E - if you did, you would not be so quick to judge. Are you aware that I had not worked with E for 11 months prior to the launch of T11? I left E's production department during the beginning of October 2006. T11 launched on August 31 of this year - 2007.

WH
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 24, 2007 02:50PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 15:36, djkuttdecks wrote:
Hart... I understand what you are saying, but let us not forget that T11 in itself is actually a rip off of someone else's idea! They knowingly ripped off Ellusionist, Wayne did so and never even told them he was leaving until it launched. What makes you think that T11's core 2 or 3 creators have ANY integrity and wouldn't "knowingly" rip off someone... its how they launched. I don't recall hearing about SD doing something like this in the past, so who do I believe? derrrr SD.
-DJ
[/quote]

Would you label your post as hearsay, or gossip? Or are you "in the know"? Please fill everyone in on your credentials and how you have been privelidged with this information...
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 24, 2007 03:02PM)
I honestly know nothing of WH's history of E and T11 but I feel if it is to be discussed it should be in it's own topic since this one spins in way to many directions as it is!
Mick
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 24, 2007 03:04PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 16:02, MickeyPainless wrote:
I honestly know nothing of WH's history of E and T11 but I feel if it is to be discussed it should be in it's own topic since this one spins in way to many directions as it is!
Mick
[/quote]

Thank you Mickey, good point...
Message: Posted by: pepka (Nov 24, 2007 03:23PM)
This may not be totally related to the current issue with Steve and T11, but I figured I shold share this. I recently purchased CFWM here on the Café'. I felt so good when I popped on the DVD and Mark Mason's first words are a thank you to Steve for use of the same gimmick. He also includes some history on the gaff as well as a letter from Steve granting him permission.
Message: Posted by: djkuttdecks (Nov 24, 2007 05:09PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 15:47, W:H wrote:
DJ:

You do not have the full facts regarding myself & E - if you did, you would not be so quick to judge. Are you aware that I had not worked with E for 11 months prior to the launch of T11? I left E's production department during the beginning of October 2006. T11 launched on August 31 of this year - 2007.

WH
[/quote]

My apologies... it was based on posts both you and brad made on your own forum at T11, perhaps your forum should up its mods so that your loose lips don't sink ships? Hart... perhaps it is gossip, even if from the horses mouth, I wouldn't know. I was only explaining what I based my assessment of T11 on as a purchasing consumer, I have a full right to do so... that's why they pay marketing and PR right? So stuff like that doesn't leak? Man a PR devision sure would have been handy during this DD fiasco huh? Maybe that's what the profits were going to go towards? Maybe that or a shiny new huffy 12 speed... weeeeeee
-DJ
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 24, 2007 05:18PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 18:09, djkuttdecks wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 15:47, W:H wrote:
DJ:

You do not have the full facts regarding myself & E - if you did, you would not be so quick to judge. Are you aware that I had not worked with E for 11 months prior to the launch of T11? I left E's production department during the beginning of October 2006. T11 launched on August 31 of this year - 2007.

WH
[/quote]

My apologies... it was based on posts both you and brad made on your own forum at T11, perhaps your forum should up its mods so that your loose lips don't sink ships? Hart... perhaps it is gossip, even if from the horses mouth, I wouldn't know. I was only explaining what I based my assessment of T11 on as a purchasing consumer, I have a full right to do so... that's why they pay marketing and PR right? So stuff like that doesn't leak? Man a PR devision sure would have been handy during this DD fiasco huh? Maybe that's what the profits were going to go towards? Maybe that or a shiny new huffy 12 speed... weeeeeee
-DJ
[/quote]

Of course you have a right to do so. Just like you have the right to spread more gossip like you did in the last part of you "apology" post, right? Maybe? lol
Message: Posted by: djkuttdecks (Nov 24, 2007 06:00PM)
Ah that was not a rumor, it was speculation (and a huffy joke)... to the educated few there is a difference.
-DJ
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 24, 2007 06:51PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 19:00, djkuttdecks wrote:
Ah that was not a rumor, it was speculation (and a huffy joke)... to the educated few there is a difference.
-DJ
[/quote]

There is a lot of that here on this thread, wouldn't you say? Speculation that is...

I guess I am not one of the educated ones DJ, could you explain the difference between a rumor and a speculation? Or do rumors just start off of speculation? Please explain...
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 24, 2007 07:17PM)
Guys, please take it to PM or start another topic!
Thanks,
Mick
Message: Posted by: djkuttdecks (Nov 24, 2007 07:28PM)
I agree Mick.

Hart I just PM'd you the definitions for rumor and speculation... no need to thank me.

For another question about DD, is it everyones opinion that schoolcraft's actions were ok or did he breach an unethical barrier by producing the actual gimmick. If not, then why?

This is not to insight a riot, I'm honestly asking other peoples opinion on the matter. I know very little about Schoolcraft but I heard his work is top-notch.
-DJ
Message: Posted by: Chad Barnard (Nov 24, 2007 07:46PM)
Schoolcraft had permission to produce the gimmick from Dusheck. What limits, if any, were on that permission will have to be addressed by Steve or Jamie.

I would assume, yeah yeah I know, that Jamie didn't know that Bueno had asked for permission from Steve years ago and was denied. Again Steve or Jamie could answer that better than I.

If Jamie had permission, the limits of that permission weren't breached, again Steve or Jamie can let us know, and he didn't know about the prior history I don't think one could lay blame on him. Does it tarnish his image? Yes. Is his image being unjustly tarnished? Not enough info in yet.
Message: Posted by: Steve Dusheck (Nov 25, 2007 01:16AM)
When I gave Schoolcraft permission to make my gimmick I assumed he would only be selling them retail to his customers. I cannot blame him at all for making thousands of them and selling them wholesale to Theory 11. I'm sure the money came in very handy for him and his family. I would probably do the same thing.
But later seeing how the gimmick was used not giving me credit makes it a matter of ethics. I personally think he should have stopped supplying the coins once he learned they were being used as a rip off of the trick I gave him permission to make. I will not comment on his ethics.
It's too difficult to judge a person without knowing all the facts. Perhaps he has major financial problems and really needs the money. That changes everything doesn't it?
When I offered him additional help on making the gimmick he never replied and he never sent me the sample of his coin that he promised. He never sent an e-mail to explain his position on the Theory 11 trick. His silence is quite loud.
I would feel bad if he really knew what was going on from the start but I don't think he did. As I said before, someday I'm sure we will be friends again. I made 100 unique gimmicked coin tricks. I'm sure some machinist will want to make some.
Steve
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 25, 2007 02:20AM)
I called Schoolcraft asking them to make the gaff for me and was told no by Mike. I then informed him I had written permission from Steve and his tone changed and said he'd ask Jamie. I got a call back from Mike later that day saying that Jamie would call me personally later that day or the next...... That was in Sept. and I never did here from him!
Mick
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 25, 2007 03:41AM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-24 20:28, djkuttdecks wrote:
I agree Mick.

Hart I just PM'd you the definitions for rumor and speculation... no need to thank me.

-DJ
[/quote]

It wasnt the definitions of the words I was concerned about. Both create lies...
Message: Posted by: Joshua Barrett (Nov 25, 2007 12:53PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 03:20, MickeyPainless wrote:
I called Schoolcraft asking them to make the gaff for me and was told no by Mike. I then informed him I had written permission from Steve and his tone changed and said he'd ask Jamie. I got a call back from Mike later that day saying that Jamie would call me personally later that day or the next...... That was in Sept. and I never did here from him!
Mick
[/quote]

more likly that was jamie just plain forgetting .... that tends to happen with him, hes way over booked
Message: Posted by: Steve Dusheck (Nov 25, 2007 01:05PM)
That reminds me of a guy who stated he heard Dusheck was difficult to do business with and heard it from several sources. The topic being discussed was my refusal to give Bueno the rights to make my gimmick to go with his variation of my trick. The comment that Dusheck was difficult to do business with had nothing to do with business or the topic being discussed, and was only meant to deceive my supporters.
I received an e-mail from a magician stating he bought DD and since "I claimed" to have invented the gimmick and since he only lived a few hours away he wanted to come to visit me and see me perform my routine. He was also bringing a few of his magician friends. He never once mentioned paying me for my time as was also falsely stated. I found the e-mail offensive.
I explained that I am always very busy inventing new tricks, making tricks or filling magic orders. If he wanted personal intstructions it would cost him $350.00 or he could buy my DVD for $10.00. He found that offensive and published my personal reply on the Café.
I was charging what I normally charge for a private party and much less than I charge for my magic lecture. I would have to stop making magic and filling orders so someone had to pay for my time.
Other magicians also found this magician's comment stating "since I claim" to be offending and also thought the price I quoted was very fair.
It was after I received support for my response on the Café did that magician say he would have probably spent a lot of money with me. It would not be as much as the orders I already needed to make.
So several people did not say I was difficult to do business with. One person stated he heard I was and said he heard it from several sources.
By the way, talks are going very well between Marc and Jonathan. It is very good business to have an unbiased third person negotiate a business deal. Most people in business know that.
Steve
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Nov 25, 2007 01:29PM)
Good news...
Message: Posted by: RCP (Nov 25, 2007 03:57PM)
I would consider an opportunity for personal instruction for $350.00 or a DVD for $10.00, from Steve Dusheck, either a bargain. The more I discover about this man and his creative genius the more I am saddened that some greedy few have driven him into seclusion. This seems to be a trend with the most creative in magic. The right to the most guarded secrets must be earned, not bought for a buck from the latest slick Willy.

I hope this ends well for all concerned. I doubt anyone at Theory 11 would want their work stolen either. Treat other as you would like to be treated is still a good idea.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 25, 2007 06:11PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 02:16, Steve Dusheck wrote:
When I gave Schoolcraft permission to make my gimmick I assumed he would only be selling them retail to his customers. I cannot blame him at all for making thousands of them and selling them wholesale to Theory 11. I'm sure the money came in very handy for him and his family. I would probably do the same thing.
But later seeing how the gimmick was used not giving me credit makes it a matter of ethics. I personally think he should have stopped supplying the coins once he learned they were being used as a rip off of the trick I gave him permission to make. I will not comment on his ethics.
It's too difficult to judge a person without knowing all the facts. Perhaps he has major financial problems and really needs the money. That changes everything doesn't it?
When I offered him additional help on making the gimmick he never replied and he never sent me the sample of his coin that he promised. He never sent an e-mail to explain his position on the Theory 11 trick. His silence is quite loud.
I would feel bad if he really knew what was going on from the start but I don't think he did. As I said before, someday I'm sure we will be friends again. I made 100 unique gimmicked coin tricks. I'm sure some machinist will want to make some.
Steve
[/quote]

Steve, I have to wonder why you are "excusing" schoolcraft. Or so it seems...

You can't blame him for making thousands of gimmicks for t11? But you can quickly blame everyone at t11? You even say that you would have done the same thing? If you and everyone else can throw stones at ALL the guys at theory 11 then don't you think Schoolcraft deserves a boulder seeing that they would have had trouble proceeding without him? I am certainly not saying we/you should hang Jamie out to dry but don't you think that there is a double standard? You won't comment on his ethics? But you sure like to comment on theory 11's, and my ethics to boot. You say its difficult to judge a person without knowing all the facts yet you are quick to judge the individuals at t11. You have also "judged" me in your posts yet you know absolutely nothing about me and I have nothing to do with t11. Pretty convenient Steve...

You mention that "fanancial" problems changes everything, "doesn't it"? What exactly does it change Steve? Please explain. I thought this wasnt about money? If it is and theory 11 pays you then will all the wrongs be forgotten as it looks like they will be forgotten for Jamie? Remember when I mentioned the money thing earlier and got jumped on? Where was everybody on this one...

You say his silence is quite loud. Yet in the very next sentence you say you don't know if he knew about t11 but you don't THINK he did. More excuses for him.

Just so everyone is clear the only person you KNOW has screwed you over is Bueno. But if you are going to make Jamie an innocent bystander then you better add the REST of t11 to that list because in this case it takes two to tango...
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 25, 2007 06:22PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 14:05, Steve Dusheck wrote:
That reminds me of a guy who stated he heard Dusheck was difficult to do business with and heard it from several sources. The topic being discussed was my refusal to give Bueno the rights to make my gimmick to go with his variation of my trick. The comment that Dusheck was difficult to do business with had nothing to do with business or the topic being discussed, and was only meant to deceive my supporters.
I received an e-mail from a magician stating he bought DD and since "I claimed" to have invented the gimmick and since he only lived a few hours away he wanted to come to visit me and see me perform my routine. He was also bringing a few of his magician friends. He never once mentioned paying me for my time as was also falsely stated. I found the e-mail offensive.
I explained that I am always very busy inventing new tricks, making tricks or filling magic orders. If he wanted personal intstructions it would cost him $350.00 or he could buy my DVD for $10.00. He found that offensive and published my personal reply on the Café.
I was charging what I normally charge for a private party and much less than I charge for my magic lecture. I would have to stop making magic and filling orders so someone had to pay for my time.
Other magicians also found this magician's comment stating "since I claim" to be offending and also thought the price I quoted was very fair.
It was after I received support for my response on the Café did that magician say he would have probably spent a lot of money with me. It would not be as much as the orders I already needed to make.
So several people did not say I was difficult to do business with. One person stated he heard I was and said he heard it from several sources.
By the way, talks are going very well between Marc and Jonathan. It is very good business to have an unbiased third person negotiate a business deal. Most people in business know that.
Steve
[/quote]

Steve, in this post it sounds like you fill a lot of orders. But a few pages back you said you had no magic left to sale because you have been stolen from so many times(starting to wonder about your defintion of stealing seeing that you authorize so many to make your products).

So was the comment about not having any magic left to sale just made to "deceive" others into supporting you? Kind of like how you accused me in your post of "deceiving" others by quoting what someone else said about dealing with you?
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 25, 2007 06:29PM)
Schoolcraft WAS granted permission to make the gaff and Bueno was DENIED!
Some of the post might be read as cynicism!
***THIS IS ONLY MY OPINION and WILL NOT BE DEBATED WITH YOU HART***
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 25, 2007 06:32PM)
?
Message: Posted by: RCP (Nov 25, 2007 06:39PM)
Whats the basis of your anger Hart? Facts hard to swallow or are you a paid stooge?
Message: Posted by: dancingm0nk3y (Nov 25, 2007 06:44PM)
I don't think he's "excusing" Schoolcraft. I think he just really wants to give him the benefit of the doubt. It's one thing to get screwed by a company, but it's something else entirely to get screwed by a friend.
Message: Posted by: RCP (Nov 25, 2007 06:56PM)
No need to answer tonight Hart, check with Bueno and see what he wants you to say next. ;-)
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 25, 2007 07:19PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 19:29, MickeyPainless wrote:
Schoolcraft WAS granted permission to make the gaff and Bueno was DENIED!
Some of the post might be read as cynicism!
***THIS IS ONLY MY OPINION and WILL NOT BE DEBATED WITH YOU HART***
[/quote]

But he was not granted permission for DD, correct? Bueno was denied BEFORE t11 was even around. Like I said the only person who has wronged Steve is Bueno. I was just trying to stop the big witchhunt. You have read this thread correct?

Steve says he has been stolen from multiple times. Can anyone comment on the actions he has taken on other "thieves"?
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 25, 2007 07:25PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 19:56, RCP wrote:
No need to answer tonight Hart, check with Bueno and see what he wants you to say next. ;-)
[/quote]

I love how the one guy who simply has a different opinion gets all the low blows and spends most of his time on the thread defending himself against silly little posts such as this.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 25, 2007 07:30PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 19:39, RCP wrote:
Whats the basis of your anger Hart? Facts hard to swallow or are you a paid stooge?
[/quote]

Definitely not angry RCP, very happy. But thank you for asking. How are you feeling?
Message: Posted by: djkuttdecks (Nov 25, 2007 07:50PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 20:25, Hart Keene wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 19:56, RCP wrote:
No need to answer tonight Hart, check with Bueno and see what he wants you to say next. ;-)
[/quote]

I love how the one guy who simply has a different opinion gets all the low blows and spends most of his time on the thread defending himself against silly little posts such as this.
[/quote]

"The love you take is equal to the love you make"
-DJ
Message: Posted by: dancingm0nk3y (Nov 25, 2007 07:54PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 20:19, Hart Keene wrote:
Like I said the only person who has wronged Steve is Bueno.[/quote]

I disagree. Theory 11, the company, has wronged Steve by publishing DD. If Bueno brought them the effect and said, "Here. This is mine and it's original, Scout's honor." Then T11 still committed a breach of ethics by not researching BEFORE publishing.

But, I still don't buy this ignorance claim since they did, in fact, put in a minor credit for Steve on the DVD.

This product reeks of something that was pushed through in the hopes that no one would notice. But, when people did notice and started to take a stand then we hear the "We're so sorry" and "We had no idea" and "it was all BJ's fault". I'm not saying that ALL the artists involved knew about this, but if they are part of the company then they ARE guilty by association.

I'm glad for Steve that they are getting closer to a settlement, but regardless of the outcome I will still remember T11 as the company that ripped off Steve Duschek with one of their initial offerings.

Clay
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 25, 2007 08:02PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 20:50, djkuttdecks wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 20:25, Hart Keene wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 19:56, RCP wrote:
No need to answer tonight Hart, check with Bueno and see what he wants you to say next. ;-)
[/quote]

I love how the one guy who simply has a different opinion gets all the low blows and spends most of his time on the thread defending himself against silly little posts such as this.
[/quote]

"The love you take is equal to the love you make"
-DJ
[/quote]

Another silly post, thanks DJ! Anyone else? Or should we try to stay on topic? I know its fun gangbanging guys but remember the thread isn't about me...
Message: Posted by: djkuttdecks (Nov 25, 2007 08:07PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 20:54, dancingm0nk3y wrote:
[quote]
But, I still don't buy this ignorance claim since they did, in fact, put in a minor credit for Steve on the DVD.

This product reeks of something that was pushed through in the hopes that no one would notice. But, when people did notice and started to take a stand then we hear the "We're so sorry" and "We had no idea" and "it was all BJ's fault".
[/quote]

This is only a theory (speculation), so do not take it for fact (Hart). If they did release the product with the hopes "maybe no one will notice" it would explain the cheap cost to some extent. Think about it... here is a great effect to launch the site, sell it cheap to move a bunch of units and get a name for supplying a great trick for fair price, and if you get caught you just pull it and apologies. Not saying that's what happened but it would get your name in the hands of many young impressionable minds (which is their biggest market).
-DJ
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 25, 2007 08:07PM)
Hart,
As far as the other tricks that have been stolen from Steve in the past could be found with some research but should not be discussed in this topic as it would be adding to the confusion!
I do know that when I did mine I was AMAZED at some of the tricks that everyone uses today were created by Steve! I wish I had 10% of his creative ability!
I'm sure that you could ask Steve directly in an E mail or PM but then again......... ;)
Mick
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 25, 2007 08:08PM)
I would still like to know what actions Steve took with the hundreds of other rip offs he has spoke of.
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 25, 2007 08:13PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 21:07, djkuttdecks wrote:
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 20:54, dancingm0nk3y wrote:
[quote]
But, I still don't buy this ignorance claim since they did, in fact, put in a minor credit for Steve on the DVD.

This product reeks of something that was pushed through in the hopes that no one would notice. But, when people did notice and started to take a stand then we hear the "We're so sorry" and "We had no idea" and "it was all BJ's fault".
[/quote]

This is only a theory (speculation), so do not take it for fact (Hart). If they did release the product with the hopes "maybe no one will notice" it would explain the cheap cost to some extent. Think about it... here is a great effect to launch the site, sell it cheap to move a bunch of units and get a name for supplying a great trick for fair price, and if you get caught you just pull it and apologies. Not saying that's what happened but it would get your name in the hands of many young impressionable minds (which is their biggest market).
-DJ
[/quote]

Good DJ, what other lies would you like to make up, oops, I mean "speculate"?

"Not saying that's what happened", although that is what I just said...DJ

BTW, Your post about Houchin was pure filth. Can you show us anything at all that backs up any of those accusations or are all your posts just "speculative" lies to assist you in your cause?
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 25, 2007 08:15PM)
ANOTHER TOPIC Hart or take it private!
Message: Posted by: djkuttdecks (Nov 25, 2007 08:21PM)
Sure can... and have, to those that inquired via PM :) Did those definitions you asked for not help you read my posts? shoot, I was counting on that. Look, if your looking for an argument then PM me... this really shouldn't be on the thread, my speculation is merely theory... Im sure I could probably come up with 10 more :)
-DJ

Steve, I don't know you but I am VERY sorry you have had this happen to you. I once had someone steal some music I produced and at the time didn't have the money to fight it legally and it hurt because it was well respected artists that I wanted to work with one day. I can only imagine how this feels, I wish my heart felt sorry could change it man. Don't let it stress you too much, what goes around comes around eh?
Message: Posted by: mfeld (Nov 25, 2007 08:35PM)
I think anyone with questions about this still should read the review of Digital Dissolve in Genii Magazine this month. I think he does a very good job analyzing the situation. It's worth the read.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Nov 25, 2007 08:39PM)
Good advice from mfeld. Also suggest folks view the entire product DVD so can discuss context etc.

Important to go to primary sources where possible.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 25, 2007 09:06PM)
Jon is right, if the DVD were viewed in it entirety I'm quite sure a lot of this would be quieted! Hart, have you seen this? I strongly suggest obtaining a copy before you continue to blindly defend your heroes!
Mick
Message: Posted by: Steve Dusheck (Nov 25, 2007 10:21PM)
Hart, I took no action at all against Theory 11. This thread was started by magicians I don't know. Other magicians contacted theory 11 on their own. David Regal wrote his review on his own. You continue to blame me because some of your idols have clay feet. Bueno was not the only person involved who knew the trick was mine. The others even put it in writing.
As I said before all you care about is your pals at Theory 11 and you insist on trying to hurt my reputation to save theirs. No one has accused your friends by name yet. They all said they made a mistake and were sorry and I said That's okay guys let's forget about it and do the right thing. So why do you still carry on with your lost cause?
I was the guest of honor at the FFFF close-up convention. You don't even get invited. Yes, all of my tricks have been copied. You will never have that problem either. And check out the high prices my old used magic gets on E-bay. My actions towards those who copied my tricks are no business of yours. Many I simply forgave. I simply invented new tricks. Every year I had 12 new tricks for Tannen's Jubilee. If I was going to the summer conventions I had 12 new tricks for those conventions too. The tricks were ripped off but I had new tricks every year. That's what I do best. I invent tricks so good that many magic dealers copy them.
After my father died I lost interest in making gimmicked coins. I kept making other tricks so my mother would feel important by folding instructions and putting the tricks in the bags. I had to keep her mind occupied with busy work. She got to know many of the famous magicians who came to my booth to buy my original magic tricks. When she died I decided to quit magic. I was sick of the the low life magic dealers stealing my tricks and new breed of young magicians with very bad manners.
But I can't stop inventing. It just happens. Plus my old time, loyal customers kept writing asking for new tricks because they liked my magic better than the stuff being sold by the magic dealers. So I started my custom club.
Some magicians simply tell me the effect they want to produce and I invent it for them. Usually in a day or two. Many times it turns out I invented the tricks years ago but never had time to put it out.
You know nothing about me yet you keep making sarcastic comments about me which has only made a lot of enemies for you. If you are a friend of theory 11 I think a lot of magicians will not want to do business with theory 11. You would be very surprised at the well known magicians I make exclusive magic for. But you are uninformed about everything I do. That's why you have to keep asking dumb questions that most working magicians already know.
Now you know that I still invent tricks and still sell a lot of magic. But it's custom made magic and I only sell my new items to magicians I know and trust. Most of them are working steady or full time professionals who don't want to do the same tricks that all the novices at Applebees perform.
You lied about me claiming you heard I was difficult to do business with and you continue to try to harm my reputation. You better read the David Regal review again.
Anything you say about me is now considered to be just another of your wild accusations. You write from ignorance as you know nothing about the many tricks I marketed over the years or any of the new items I continue to produce.
I asked you to tell me exactly who at theory 11 you were so concerned about and offered to tell you if they were involved with knowingly putting out my trick.
As for Schoolcraft, I can forgive anyone I feel like forgiving. I don't have to explain my reasons to you. You can't forgive anyone who thinks Theory 11 copied my trick. There is a big difference between a magician with a family having financial problems and a a group of people at magic company making my trick. It seems you have no compassion either.
You even questioned why I had to have someone else talk to theory 11 for me. Everyone else knows that's how business is done. That third person has been doing a wonderful job for Theory 11 and me.
You are the typical know it all young man who wants to be a professional magician but needs to buy tricks from theory 11 because you can't do anything original on your own. You like to feel important by being sarcastic to every one with ethics who supports me.
Have someone read the David Regal review to you several times. It wasn't just Bueno. I feel sorry for you because no one at Theory 11 really cares about you either. Your idols you are so concerned about were wrong. Jonathan Bayme is fixing the problems because he seems to care more about doing what is right than you do.
You are just plain mean. It is the people like you who keep other magicians from making posts. You still hate me while I an getting along with Jonathan Bayme.
Thanks to you I have made many new magician friends. Our dislike for you brought us together. Three of them are already allowed to buy most of my new products. I expect more magicians to join the club soon.
I find your hate for me annoying but it has helped my custom made magic business. DD didn't help my business but you alone brought it back to life. I think I will name a new trick after you. I already have the effect in mind I just have to work out the moves. If it's as funny as I think it will be I might give it to Theory 11 to make.
Steve
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 25, 2007 10:44PM)
[quote]
On 2007-11-25 21:39, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
Good advice from mfeld. Also suggest folks view the entire product DVD so can discuss context etc.

Important to go to primary sources where possible.
[/quote]

As I have said before, I didn't want to buy a product in question.

Would someone be kind enough to send me a copy? I would pay for shipping and handling both ways. I would also buy a copy if someone has one. Please send me a pm if you are interested.

Still, how would the product change how I feel about this? I am not denying the effect is Steve's, nor am I denying t11 made a mistake...
Message: Posted by: lunatik (Nov 25, 2007 11:14PM)
Steve told hart LOLOLOL. I'd just give it up if I were you. it might be asking a bit much, but please do.
Message: Posted by: MickeyPainless (Nov 25, 2007 11:27PM)
Now now ;)
Message: Posted by: Hart Keene (Nov 26, 2007 01:21AM)
Steve,

I would say that was a "Pot calling the kettle black" post, wouldn't you say? I was going to report your post for flaming but I decided it should be left up so people can see who the bigger person was. Who didn't resort to name calling and personal insults. You think I hate you Steve? Are you really serious? I don't hate anyone on here, and if someone hates me over having a different opinion and asking some questions then they need to re-think things. I do feel you hate me over this Steve, its obvious after reading your insult filled post. I'm sorry you have so much pain in your life that you have to take all your hatred out on a curious online onlooker. Someone who has done nothing to you personally, just posted his own thoughts and questions on a thread in an online forum. Pretty sad Steve. You don't seem to mind the rumors and lies your online supporters spread about other individuals, eh Steve? I haven't been half as nasty as they have...

As I have said in multiple posts Steve, I don't know most of the people on theory 11 and I don't own or perform any of their effects. I am not part of theory 11 or affiliated with them in any way, I don't know why you think this and am not sure why you would be angry with them over what I said. I do not idolize anyone, I respect them because they are good at what they do.

You are good at what you do Steve. Believe it or not I respect you. But I don't care what gimmicks and effects you have created. I don't even care about FISM. You still put your pants on one leg at a time, just like me. You have no right to spew the hate and insults you did in your last post. If you think posting my viewpoint and asking some questions deserved that type of low blow attack then shame on you.

If someone on here wants to be my enemy over having a different opinion so be it. I wouldn't want to associate with people as trivial as that anyway. I perform for lay people, not magicians. Lay people pay a lot better than magicians do, they don't steal your ideas either. I wish Steve could comment on me and my magic but unfortunately he doesn't know anything about me. Just the pot calling the kettle black again I guess. I remember someone on this thread saying that its not good "to judge without gathering all the facts".

I learned one thing, don't go into a witchhunt when the mob already has their torches lit, you'll get burned...

I'm done commenting here(I'm sure all of you are stoked) unless someone comments on me or my posts, and needs "correction".

I hope things work out with Steve D and theory 11, I'm sure they will...
Message: Posted by: princehal (Nov 26, 2007 07:33AM)
Someone here needs "correction" Mr. Keene. You can find that person in a mirror. Your posts have been largely disrespectful when dealing with Mr. Dusheck, and you come across as a very petty person with an agenda.

Threatening to "report" someone to teacher shows which level you apparently want to operate on, although there is nothing in Mr. Dusheck's posts that is not a reasonable defense for the unfounded accusations you felt free to fling around here.

What is funny is that, although you decided to parrot and promote the idea that Mr. Dusheck was "difficult" to work with, he has been nothing but forthright in his posts here. Your "character" however, shines through in each post you make on this subject, each accusation you fling, each dismissal of true accomplishment, and each trite defense you make of questionable business tactics.

But hey, it's only a coin trick, right?

If not for the, as you so charmingly put, the "mob" here, do you honestly think that this issue would have been resolved well? Sometimes the "mob" is right and IS speaking truth to power.

It is this kind of defense of fellow Magicians that give me hope for the community. What gives you hope?
Message: Posted by: jimbowmanjr (Nov 26, 2007 08:07AM)
Hart,

Give it a rest man. You might see yourself as the voice of reason or the lone dissenter in this discussion but you are nothing more than a distraction from the real issue that has been and is still being worked out.

DD was and is Steve Dusheck's routine and gimmick period. There were additional handling's included by Lee that Steve admitted were good but the fact remains that this was pushed out after permission was requested and denied. No credit was given to Steve for his gimmick or for his routine C/S Transpo. As far as who all was guilty in this I am sure that will never be revealed publicly aside from the known offenders. T11 (Houchin and Bayme) have come here to say they are working out the solution with Steve and Marc DeSouza. I am not sure what you are trying to do here aside from turn this into a thread that eventually gets locked.

It is disturbing that Steve gets ripped off and somehow this thread turns into an attack on his character and accomplishments by none other than Hart Keene. I have no idea what your agenda is here or who is possibly pushing your buttons in the background but if you have any sense about you I would take a walk from this conversation. Trying to fling mud on a guy who has bent over backwards in this deal and who has had countless contributions to magic throughout the last half a century is something to be ashamed of I assure you. You threw the first stone in this conversation that irritated the situation and forced Steve to come on here and defend himself. Yet you stand there now as if the rest of us are the bad guys who stand up for Steve and his creations......

--Jim