|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2 | ||||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27300 Posts 
|
BS, if hold as true that anything published is essentially up for grabs as public domain knowlege, we agree.
Some seem to believe that any item performed in public is up for disection and reconstruction with intent to perform, market or publish. I happen to disagree. If you believe that it's okay to copy other people's work, then you SHOULD also accept that your own work will be copied as seen fit by others. If that's okay with you, fine.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
|
JackScratch Inner circle 2151 Posts
|
See now, for me, a person has to show a willingness and desire to learn all the parts of magic, not just the effects. Nothing harms magic more than a bad magician, in all their forms, not just ones who expose magic by executing a move badly. I realy like Bill's "need to know" statement. I would say their is a lot of ground covered in those few words, important ground. My criteria for sharing an effect is believing that the person I'm sharing it with is going to actualy perform it, and perform it well. This, of course, does not include the sharing of copyrighted intelectual property, which on the bases of copyright laws is not protected, but from a moral standpoint, should be.
|
|||||||||
Bill Nuvo Inner circle 3094 Posts or 2742 Posts
|
I am having a young member from this board visit with me for a job shadow day as part of his schooling. He has asked me about showing him some Andrew Mayne stuff. I of course told him I could not without Andrew's permission.
Well this member contacted Andrew and asked permission. He got it (you often just have to ask). Of course he got permission because I own most of his stuff and I won't be marketing it for my own gain. I made this member go through this to teach what I consider to be proper ethics. He has an obious interest in the art, but as stated above, intellectual property should be protected. This I think is the one of the ideal ways to go when discussing secrets, just behind learning from the originator. |
|||||||||
Bill Hallahan Inner circle New Hampshire 3226 Posts
|
If someone is asking how a trick is done in the context of them viewing someone else's show then I won't discuss methods. I would want others to do the same if they saw me perform.
Humans make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to create boredom. Quite astonishing.
- The character of ‘Death’ in the movie "Hogswatch" |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21245 Posts
|
Where is it written anywhere except here that a public performance of a trick gives ANYONE the right to disect and copy and use the material?
This is an idiotic notion at best. Sorry the post may well be deleted for this but please consider editing it if you must. But the word fits. This really makes no sense to me at all. This is why magic is going to die on the vine as an art form. We will be right next to mimes in NO time. A public performance gives you the absolute right to enjoy or dislike the performance as you see fit. You can then comment on WHY you feel either way. You in no way have any right to duplicate that performance segment. When did performance of things give anyone the right to duplicate and discuss methods? I agree with people who have marketed effects, do what you will. With so much material availabe why go to someone elses act? We have more written material about our art than any other performance art and yet we have to lift tings from other acts? IF you see Michael Finney do a trick it by no means says you have the rights to do his trick. Or worse yet to tell others how it is done. PERIOD!
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24315 Posts
|
Discussing the "secrets" of a performer is a Muggle thing. If you have ever done any stage work, I am sure you have seen people in the audience carrying on a conversation with one another, discussing possible methods.
Often, our "magical brethren" are the worst of the lot. Dunninger used to complain about them. What really insulted him is that they almost always got it wrong! One afternoon, I was performing at the Renaissance Festival. My mother and father were in the second row. I started into the Linking Rings, and a fellow behind my father began to explain to his girl friend how it worked. My method was a bit different from the normal one -- I have a couple of things that allow me to handle the rings very freely. But he was getting too close for comfort. So my father turned around and asked him -- "You seem to be very knowledgeable. Are you a magician?" "Yes, I am." "Are you a member of IBM?" "Yes, I am." "That's odd. I guess the rules have changed. When I was a member we were required to take an oath not to reveal the secrets." The man clamped his jaw shut and didn't utter another peep. The funny thing about it was that he was the lawyer who drew up my incorporation papers! But you would think these guys would know better.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
|
BlackShadow Special user London UK 666 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2006-03-23 14:57, Dannydoyle wrote: What does it matter where it might be written? It may be written in some code such as for the IBM or SAM or similar. If you are a member of such an organisation, then that's cool. Be true to your membership, and follow their principles. Otherwise you are free to follow your own philosophy in so far as it fits in with the law of the land you are in. Josh was quite specific in what he asked. Would you share knowledge of a method, after watching a video clip, with someone you believed to be a bona fide magician? I say I would. I don't care if it's written in the Bible, the Koran, the rules of the Magic Circle, or any other place you care to mention that I shouldn't. I'm not a sheep that jumps through other people's hoops, nor am I likely to become one 
In spite of that, although I'm not a member of the IBM I'd never reveal the linking rings to lay people. And doing it someone else's performance is ten times the bad manners. |
|||||||||
|
JackScratch Inner circle 2151 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2006-03-23 14:57, Dannydoyle wrote: Danny, while I agree with your conclusion, the path you took there is completely wrong. If you believe exposure will decimate the magic industry, then you realy don't have all that much respect for what we do. I am as against exposure as you can be, but the industry crippling arguement is a weak one, full of holes. Personaly, I don't understand how anyone with two braincells to rub together can't understand it is rude to talk about execution while sitting in an audience. How does anyone on this planet get the ide that someone watching a magic show wants them to tell them how the things are done. It's just stupid. That being said, that and other kinds of exposure have been around a very long time, and while certainly a great deal of damage has been done, I think predicting the end of magic as an art form may be a bit premature. What exposure does do, is hurt the audience. An audience who have done nothing to deserve their right to enjoy magic, as it is ment to be enjoyed ,removed from them. Exposure puts the secrets right in front of them, where it can't be ignored. Exposure makes bad magicians of one variety or another. Exposure doesn't hurt all that much, it does a far worse thing, it hurts the innocent audience, and it hurts them in a way that is perminant. Exposure makes the suspension of disbelief more and more difficult toi achieve. |
|||||||||
|
DanielSteep Inner circle 1409 Posts
|
I am the child from the board that is going to be with Mr.billtheentertainer and I have allways learnt thru life that there is no harm in asking and you are never going to get where you want to go without asking for other ppls help.
And yesa bill I do have a love and passion for the art of magic! |
|||||||||
|
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27300 Posts
|
What distinguishes our part of theater arts from the rest is the mystery behind how we make seemingly impossible things happen.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Josh the Superfluous Inner circle The man of 1881 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2006-03-23 17:58, JackScratch wrote: That's the bottom line. If everything were exposed we could all do "magic for magicians" types of tricks. The world would be like one big magic club. Everyone would have an uncle who does a sucker TT vanish, instead of the traditional one. We could go on. But the world would become a little less magical, and a little more puzzling. Even if we could agree on 10 commandments of magic ethics, the worst offenders would continue to offend. Due to the fact that you guys are helping me and making my head spin at the same time, I would like to offer this hypothetical situation for discussion. I think it would help me figure this whole mess out (or make it worse. I'm just going for different). Let's say I saw Magician "A" perform Scotch & Soda. I knew my local shop sold props for that effect, so I thought that was what I saw. While fiddling around with coins, I figure out how to do it without special props. I teach my method to a friend and he informs me, that is how Magician "A" does his. Is it mine to teach?
What do you want in a site? "Honesty, integrity and decency." -Mike Doogan
"I hate it, I hate my ironic lovechild. I didn't even have anything to do with it" Josh #2 |
|||||||||
|
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24315 Posts
|
Josh:
This comes up more often than you would think. What you do is approach magician "A" and show him what you have come up with. Explain that you arrived at it independently. Most guys figure out a way to settle this kind of thing out. There is always the possibility that your friend is mistaken. I think everyone on the board here who has done sleight of hand for any amount of time has "invented" things that other people have invented before. Sometimes it depends on who gets it into print first.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
|
BlackShadow Special user London UK 666 Posts
|
You'll probably find Magician A got his inspiration from Magician B or Bobo's Modern Coin Magic or somewhere else. And even if he did think it independently, it has most likely been done by Magician B or published elsewhere previously.
I find it a silly notion that someone "rediscovers" an old principle then lays current claim to it, and then moans about ethics if anyone else happens to do something similar. An idea of courtesy that exists to give some measure of protection to geniunely new thinking, is more often than not misused to give false claim to the right to make a quick buck out of something that was effectively already in the publc domain. |
|||||||||
|
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27300 Posts
|
So BS, under those sweeping generalizations you mean ... what?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
|
JackScratch Inner circle 2151 Posts
|
He means that he doesn't believe reverse engineering exists.
|
|||||||||
|
BlackShadow Special user London UK 666 Posts
|
JT, I mean that there's plenty of people pushing out things which are minor performance variations on existing ideas, and that one shouldn't tie oneself in knots if you want to put out your own performance variation based on the same existing idea.
As an example, how many variations are there on those watches which stop at certain time thought of by the spectator as used in mentalism? (Eg Time machine) All the various creators claim that theirs was the original, or had some earth shatteringly original feature. It's boring. Just get out there and create and modify using your own thinking. |
|||||||||
|
Josh the Superfluous Inner circle The man of 1881 Posts
|
Due to the potential misuse of courtesy, don't use it?
I agree with Bill's last post. But I guess my hypothetical didn't help me like I thought. Dear Video Clip Magician, While watching a clip from your TV appearance over and over, I noticed you had combined 2 classic principles in a rather unique way. I would like to teach this combo to some faceless avatar, whom I believe to be a serious student of magic but could very well be Penguin Magic's research and development man. Would you mind? Hmmm Maybe it did help. How about just hinting? e.g.. "Watch his left hand after he gives her the copper coin."
What do you want in a site? "Honesty, integrity and decency." -Mike Doogan
"I hate it, I hate my ironic lovechild. I didn't even have anything to do with it" Josh #2 |
|||||||||
|
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27300 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2006-03-24 08:02, BlackShadow wrote: Two items there First, IMHO far too many, and I wonder how many have the permission of the effect's inventor? As to "get out there and create...": Can we agree that one would be courteous to first buy the original, and then go do/perform your own way as suits you? Second, about what's being sold in magicdom. Very strange time we're in now. My feeling is that scripts (the story etc) are personal and can be sold as text items which make reference to the methods offered by the effect engineers. If someone truly believes they have gotten a great script that is novel in our craft and has merit on its own, then sure, they should be able to sell it as a valuable item for other performers AS AN ADDITION TO THE ORIGINAL method, and does not include the method discussion of the original. IE can cite, yet not reveal the original. I believe performers are expected to evolve their own scripts and staging and blocking and eventually even their own props for known and marketed magic items. Whether or not such custom tailored items really have a big place in our market or not is a strange question. What works best for you is probably an awkward fit for others. I've held off on the "your own performance variation" part when it comes to something seen that has not yet been offered by its inventor or innovator. Look at Richard Ross's floating violin, multiplying clocks and linking rings act. Till he published some of that stuff it would have been very bad form to take the same approach as he chose for those tricks after seeing him perform. Same for Del Ray's electronic wonders. Then again, let's say someone asked one of those guys for permission to use something from their act and was told "yes". At that point there is only the issue of publication between this person and publishing if it gets to that. Just another request to make. Seems pretty straight forward to me. What do you think?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21245 Posts
|
The real difference becomes when you do magic to eat. when it is your living.
then instead of trading secrets to everyone you seem to meet and setting your own criteria, that never effect you, then you may see it different. BS your obviously not a paid pro.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Food for thought » » Is this exposure? (SFW) (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2 | ||||||||||
Posted: Mar 23, 2006 02:15 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 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 < 
|