|
|
|
|||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27300 Posts 
|
We know uncle Charlie bought a thumbtip at a magic kiosk and shows his family and friends a nice vanish of a dime using the thing. He found the trick in the instructions that came with the TT or in a book at the local bookstore.
Let's say we want to fool him and use a dime and penny set to apparently vanish two coins. It goes over so well we decide to write the thing up and make an e-book out of it and want to sell it to magicians. What if a magician sees the demo video and asks "how is that different than the thing anyone can find in the muggle book?". Do we need to protect secrets (from each other as magicians) which are available in books that muggles have ready access? Can we use the notion of PUBLIC DOMAIN IN MAGICDOM to describe items whose secret principles and mechanics are available to muggledom? Since a secret cannot be patented, what then of mechanical toys sold to muggles? Does their mechanics become public domain in magicdom? I'm taking the position that since magic depends upon secrets, and that if a muggle can buy a thing, it is not a secret, that all public availability implies a status of PUBLIC DOMAIN IN MAGICDOM. What are your thoughts?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|
Pachin Regular user 153 Posts
|
John this is a very interesting subject. I am glad you brought it up. I would like to add another example in this threat if you do not mind.
There is a local magic store in Downtown San Antonio TX. They sell a lot of the commercial tricks, you know scotch and soda, the TT, the flying card De-lite etc. ( I am just going to call them commercial type just for explnation purposes - no offense). The store has a TV in the main wall showing, the whole day, the magic videos that they sell. You can just go to the store stand up in front of the TV and learn free magic. In addition, the employees at the store are showing the tricks that they sell to the general public. If you buy the trick they have a room in the back where they will teach you what you just purchased. However, sometimes when they show the tricks in their little shows they mess it up and expose the secret or partially flash it. I have seen all kinds of laymen buying the tricks and I am sure they are not really interested in magic. They just want to learn how it is done or play with it for the rest of the day. The sad part is that many of these trick have methods or props that are very important for us in more advance effects. For example the IT. The store as I said is in the middle of Downtown where hundreds and hundreds of people and turist visit every day. I am wondering how many of our secrets are obsolete now days because this commercialization. |
|
Bill Ligon Inner circle A sure sign of a misspent youth: 6437 Posts
|
Don't misunderstand; I do not support exposure of magic secrets, but I think a lot is easily available to "Muggles" via not only magic stores but libraries and bookstores as well. Anyone can go to a public library and check out books on magic at no cost to them. "Uncle Joe" is sometimes so proud of his recently-purchased magic trick that he shows it and its secret to his kids, their friends, and everyone at his job. However, the memory of Muggles is short. How many of them remember anything exposed by Valentino? How many even remember his TV appearances, for that matter? Let's face it: exposure will happen and has been happening for a very long time, but we are still here.
That said, the real secrets of magic lie in how the "tricks" are presented, and can't really be exposed. I don't believe in the hoarding of secrets from other magicians. This is absurd on the face of it, since most of them are readily available, anyway. Exceptions to this are perhaps original secrets of a working performer that he wishes to keep to himself. Then again, how long is he going to keep them from other magicians? Even should they be learned by other magicians, they remain the performer's property, and using them is stealing.
Author of THE HOLY ART: Bizarre Magick From Naljorpa's Cave. NOW IN HARDCOVER! VIEW: <BR>www.lulu.com/content/1399405 ORDER: http://stores.lulu.com/naljorpa
<BR>A TASSEL ON THE LUNATIC FRINGE |
|
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27300 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2005-09-30 17:44, Bill Ligon wrote:...That said, the real secrets of magic lie in how the "tricks" are presented... I disagree. Knowledge of the "how to" pretty much taints the audience. I can't see things the way I used to before I knew. Where I once was merely attentive I now KNOW where to attend. The induction of the state we call "magic" requires a difference between the perceived and the expected. Once we know what we are watching, all that is left is to enjoy the quality and character of the performance, the magic, the hole in our knowledge and the awe that goes with it are gone. Where we once wondered how the ball floats we now admire how well the performer did the zombie and are perhaps left with some minor engineering questions. A great loss IMHO, and one I feel we ought to spare our audiences.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
Tom Cutts Staff Northern CA 5930 Posts
|
Jonathan,
Are you allowing for the stealing of material simply because of the choice of where it was published? Can you clarify what you mean? I am inclined to agree with Bill. If I know where you are inclined to attend, then my ability to deceive you is the same as my ability to deceive the uninitiated. Cheers, Tom |
|
Bill Ligon Inner circle A sure sign of a misspent youth: 6437 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2005-10-01 19:58, Jonathan Townsend wrote: I see your point, Jonathan, but most magic "secrets" are absurdly simple and readily available to anyone with enough curiosity to seek them out. The real magic lies in how these secrets are used, I think. Many of our favorite effects can be figured out by a ten-year-old if he thinks really hard for twenty minutes or so. The real secret is to keep him from thinking that hard. Please forgive my temerity in disagreeing with you as I respect your opinions and agree with you most of the time, and I don't have the status you have in the magic community. However, I feel rather strongly about this. I don't like exposure either, but I think we worry too much about how it affects us. Posted: Oct 2, 2005 12:25am ------------------------------------------------- I am afraid I may have diverted this discussion from its intended track. If so, I apologize and will shut up. Posted: Oct 3, 2005 1:49am ------------------------------------------------- Jonathan, I dispute your suggestion that the sense of magic is lost when one knows the secret. Typically, shamans, "witch doctors," use sleight-of-hand and other trickery to accomplish their magic. They view the trickery as the real magic behind the display. Sleight-of-hand or the knowledge of a gimmick or gaff are seen as magical powers in themselves. There is no sense of guilt in fooling their clients as the trickery is part of the magic. The magic is no less real to them even when they know (of course) the secret. I am sure that exposure occurs in so-called "primitive" societies, too, but does this make the shaman less effective? Apparently not. Doesn't something similar occur in our own culture? How else can you explain the continued success of fortune tellers and phony spiritualist mediums? Have they not been exposed time and time again? Don't we do something not unlike that of the shaman when we believe the coin is in the hand when it really is not? I do not feel I have lost the sense of wonder, of magic. When I watch a well-done effect, I still feel, if only for a instant, the magic, the awe that a layman feels. Then, perhaps, the rational mind intrudes and I think about how it was done, but I still experience that moment of magic.
Author of THE HOLY ART: Bizarre Magick From Naljorpa's Cave. NOW IN HARDCOVER! VIEW: <BR>www.lulu.com/content/1399405 ORDER: http://stores.lulu.com/naljorpa
<BR>A TASSEL ON THE LUNATIC FRINGE |
Lee Darrow V.I.P. Chicago, IL USA 3588 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2005-09-30 12:46, Pachin wrote: With respect to the videotapes playing in the store window all day: At the beginning of every video tape that I have seen is a notice about the commercial performance and use of that video tape in a public venue. That magic shop is, in all probability, violating that warning and the copyright holder's legal rights. While I am not an attorney, I have been informed by several people who are and by several people who produce these videos that such use of these videos is illegal and could be prosecuted under the copyright laws of the United States. As an aside, if the dealer is a member of the MDA, one would think that a note to the MDA would result in some form of action from them regarding exposure! But, then again, the MDA has not always been the most rapidly responding organization in the world when it comes to accusations like that - but what magical organization really actively does pursue its rules on exposure all that proactively? When IS the last time someone was tossed out of a national or international magical organization for exposure? I don't seem to recall anyone in the last fifteen or twenty years... Lee Darrow, C.H.
http://www.leedarrow.com
<BR>"Because NICE Matters!" |
|
magician2000 New user Phoenix, Arizona 62 Posts
|
Jonathan... I have another interesting situation... This on real... Subject ... Me:
I was in a used book store last summer in a small town in CA, and came across a rather large collection a magic books... These were purchased at an estate sale that had a lot of other books. To have purchased all of these books new would have been close to $750 to $1000 dollars. They just arrived at the shop and had not even been tagged for sale yet. As they had not been priced yet, I made an offer to the sales clerk of $50 dollars for the lot, she countered with $100, and we settled on $75, which at the time was all that was in my wallet... This is where I am asking your ethical opinions on the transaction... 1. As I knew the retail value of the books. 2. Typicaly a used book store will sell the books at 50% of the retail value. 3. I actualy purchased them at 10% of the retail value. 4. Oh, yes... The books were in absolutly mint condition, the previous owner took meticulous care of them. Do you think that it was unethical to take advantage of the book seller, or prudent purchasing by the buyer. (Myself) I am going with the prudent purchaser, but would appreciate your thoughts on this
Dominic Marion
Sèan's Bar Athlone County Westmeath Ireland "Create a world where science and technology are celebrated... where young people dream of becoming science and technology heroes..." (Dean Kamen ) |
|
edh Inner circle 4698 Posts
|
Magician2000,I have a comment if I may. In my opinion it was a prudent purchase on your part. She wanted a price for the books. You both negotiated a price of purchase. This was a win win situation. You got the books at a bargain and she got what she felt was a good price for the books.
Specialty books are in general of no use to people other that the persons interested in that specialty. The magic books that you purchased were just a commodity to be sold at a price she arrived at. Nothing unethical here.
Magic is a vanishing art.
|
|
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27300 Posts
|
Thank you for negotiating and giving the muggle money for the books. And for taking the books back to magicdom. You bought the contents of those books perhaps a few weeks longer till they are scanned and put on the web into torrent sites for all find as amusement.
On a deeper level I agree with edH about commodities, and hold that ANY magic one can buy for money need not be quibbled over as far as secrets go. This deeper reason is why I want the magic market to separate from the muggle market.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|
edh Inner circle 4698 Posts
|
J.T. Perhaps I should have edited the below statement:
Quote:
The magic books that you purchased were just a commodity to be sold at a price she arrived at. TO: "The magic books that you purchased were, TO HER, just a commodity to be sold at a price she arrived at.
Magic is a vanishing art.
|
George Ledo Magic Café Columnist SF Bay Area 3042 Posts
|
Going back to the original subject:
Quote:
On 2005-09-30 11:01, Jonathan Townsend wrote: I have two thoughts on this. First, the use of the term "public domain." I'm a set designer, not a lawyer, but I'm going to say this anyway. The term "public domain" has a specific legal definition: it's right there for all to see in the USPT office Web site. Basically it means that no one owns the rights to a specific work. It does not mean that the work has been "published" or that it's available to the general public. I've seen umpteen posts here in the Café from people who seem to believe that anything published (written, posted, DVD'd, etc.) is in the public domain because it's no longer held inside a safe in the creator's library. That's not the case. Publishing something does not place it in the public domain. If it did, then, for instance, the Harry Potter books would be in the public domain and free for all to use and copy at will. Try doing that and then explaining it to the Warner Brothers legal department. I (think) I see where you're going with this, Jon, but I'd suggest finding another term instead of re-defining an existing and often-misinterpreted one. My second thought is on the distinction between a magician and a non-magician. What IS the distiction? When does someone cross the line between being a "lay person" who walks into a magic shop and buys a trick, and being a "magician?" I was rattling cages at my IBM ring thirty years ago with this question, but no one ever offered an answer: it was always a matter of "we" and "them." Does one cross the line when he or she joins the Café? Are there muggles among us? Why did the rabbit cross the road? Does a dove take a dump in the woods? I know there was a thread on "what makes a magician" recently, and I read through most of it, but I still didn't see a definitive answer. IS there a definitive answer? In reality, anything in a magic shop, anything in a bookstore or the public library, anything on the Web, is available to the general public. Ahhhh, those imponderable questions...
That's our departed buddy Burt, aka The Great Burtini, doing his famous Cups and Mice routine
www.georgefledo.net Latest column: "Sorry about the photos in my posts here" |
|
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27300 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2005-10-28 10:37, George Ledo wrote: I am not using the term "public domain (in muggle courts)" I am using the term "public domain in magicdom" Like the French Drop, we may sometimes cite the book that offers the first description, yet we don't have to treat the thing like somebody's PRIVATE secret which was given to us directly and under trust of maintained secrecy. We are free to toss the term around IN MAGICDOM and refine and publish variations. We are free to teach our peers and treat the thing as freely as we treat the air and water in our environment. Quote:
My second thought is on the distinction between a magician and a non-magician. ...Does one cross the line when he or she joins the Café? ... There is the most basic question in magic. Here is the latest of my thinking on the matter: You get yourself a volunteer and DO what you do. IF they say "nice trick" you are a muggle. If they ask something like "is that wand real?", you are a magician (at that time and place). If they ask to examine the props, you might be on the right path though have yet to own the magic as something which comes from your will. Magic exists as a response and reflection inside the audience. One may as well rate those who can elicit that response on how effectively, how readily and how certainly that will elicit that response. IMHO it's like other interpersonal emotional events, you know it when it happens. Consider how it is for you in the audience or in the movie theater when the drama has an emotional moment you you can FEEL WITH the actors for that moment. You for get the screen and the rest of the made up world and are IN THE FEELING. There is the basic underlying truth upon which magic builds. When you perform, the environment becomes the stage or movie screen and THEY step into it. The rest has to be believable so they can react to it. Okay that's my perspective on the matter as of 12:41pm Monday 10/31/05. Happy Halloween!
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|
George Ledo Magic Café Columnist SF Bay Area 3042 Posts
|
I've been pondering this question of where someone crosses the line for years, and recently I've started discussing it at home. Donna and I had an interesting talk the other morning. Here's a bit of background.
A few years ago we had a couple of friends over for dinner. One had been a performing magician for years, mostly doing churches and private parties. The other one was very active as a magical clown. They had shown us tapes of their performances when we had dinner at their house, so we thought it would be fun to do a show for them. So Donna and I struck a deal: I would train her to do a short act and she would do it. Donna had never done any magic, had no particular interest in performing, and, as far as I can remember, has never asked me how something is done, since she's aware of the secrecy clause. Being a magician is just not something she's interested in. Anyway, we set up a video camera in the TV room in the basement and I spent about a week training her an hour or two a day. There were three tricks: a sucker torn and restored napkin, confetti to water, and the temple screen. The show went flawlessly. Our friends thoroughly enjoyed it, particularly the surprise element of Donna doing the act instead of me. But, since that day, she has shown absolutely no interest in doing magic again. So my question to her a couple of days ago was, what's a magician? She responded, someone who does magic. At which point I asked her if she was a magician due to having performed that act. She said no: she hasn't performed since then and she has no real interest in doing magic. But I pointed out that according to her definition she had been a magician when she did the act, and she had to agree. Then I asked what I am (a loaded question, but we stayed on the topic  ). She started to say I was a magician, but then caught herself. I haven't performend in %$^&*&^ years. I've been with IBM since 1967 when I joined at 16, I own a number of books and some props, I keep up with it, and now I'm writing a column here in the Café. At which point she said I was a non-practicing magician.
Okay, I could buy that. But I still don't know where one crosses the line. 
That's our departed buddy Burt, aka The Great Burtini, doing his famous Cups and Mice routine
www.georgefledo.net Latest column: "Sorry about the photos in my posts here" |
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Public domain and the muggle market (0 Likes) | |
Posted: Sep 30, 2005 03:01 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.08 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
|
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < 
|