Huh? "intesting"? Senica?
We all do have something and that's our own reasoning whether it's up to anyone elses standards or not.

Are we all made up of the same mind and our difference is out point of view?

Jaz, I'm looking for something to convince the folks at wikipedia that magic methods have no place on public forums. The old Senica quote is good, about how magic intreagues till you know how its done. Add that to your statement about our profession and together they are almost an argument that could sway them.

OK Jonathan.
I too would like to see this stopped but really have no idea how to convince anyone to not make our secrets public. Hopefully you'll have better luck.

Bish,
I hope I understand your post.
If everyone were "made up of the same mind" we would still be in living in caves in some valley.
It's the ones who step out of the cave and leave the valley that open new frontiers.

The world is full of gray areas with pro and cons about many, many things ranging from points of view on religion to what color is best for card backs. We can argue and discuss all we want and may never be in agreement. It's just the way it is.

Jaz in hypnosis theory and in theology the saying is that we are all made up of the same mind the difference is our point of view. The same mind is often called today the theory of the Universal Mind.

Suggested reading the Magic Of Believing - Claud Bristol

Glenn, is the the author of this book a plastic surgeon? If so I read this book many years ago and it is a great book.

I don't know. It was on the best sellers list for years and it is still in print.

I just did a Google on this and it is the same book I read years ago. This is a very good book.

Hi, Bob,
I strongly disagree with the idea that reselling/giving away a trick, video or secret is stealing. Nor do I believe that it is stealing to teach someone a trick.
A secret, once manifested as a trick, lesson on a dvd or in a book becomes a commodity like any other commodity. As long as I am not selling copies of the items, I am doing nothing illegal or immoral.

There are many armchair lawyers and armchair philosophers who go to google and pick up a few terms from these areas and put them on the forum to try to cover the real reason they don't want their commodities resold: They don't want to lose money. There is nothing wrong with this, please don't misunderstand me but to label the reselling as immoral can only truly be justified within one's own subjective view of morality.

If you want to get rid of immorality in magic, I suggest that you go after those dealers and publishers who place blatant lies in their trick descriptions and then hide behind this ridiculous notion that they cannot tell the whole truth because it will give away the trick. This is not true. I have seen many trick descriptions that were completely honest and the tricks have sold very well judging from the reviews I've seen.

My favorite example: "...at the end of the trick, all the other cards are immediately shown to be different" when, in fact, the cards are gimmicked and the rest cannot be shown without a ds or some other sleight. I have seen this same description put more honestly as, "with further handling(described in the instructions) the deck can be immediately examined". They then go on to describe how this is accomplished.
And please don't get me started on the asinine outlook that "the magicians should know better". Again, this is an outlook that magicians apply only to the magic purchases that people make. This implies that a newcomer to our art who is not wise in the dishonest ways of some
dealers deserves to be ripped off until they begin to realize that there is a great deal of dishonesty inherent in the sales aspect of magic. For all of the armchair philosophers out there, keep in mind that the aim of most philosophical ideologies is consideration for one's fellow man and not caring that a newcomer is being ripped off is not in keeping with any philosophical out look that I have ever read of.

I do not believe in copying videos and selling the pirated copies but there is nothing wrong or immoral with reselling any commodity that one has paid for in good faith. As far as the legality goes, I spoke with a lawyer not long ago who told me that most lawyers who specialize in intellectual property rights say that it is a tough area to understand.

Many magicians have a problem with the internet shops pushing the brick and mortar shops out of business. Well, that's life in the world of big business. Oh, I'm sorry, did you not know that magic has a very lucrative sales aspect?? Or do you believe that magic shops should somehow not be affected by the laws of simple economics: Consumers will go where the best prices are and right now that is on the internet.
I don't care if I buy my invisible deck from a 16 year old kid who is selling from his basement and has no overhead. If I can get it for 3 dollars less than in a magic shop, I will buy it. And this is usually the case.
But, again, magicians want their world to be different. Show me a magician who claims that he doesn't look for the best deal in other aspects of his life and I will show you a dishonest or not very intelligent magician.

Howard

For anyone who read my post before I caught my mistake, yes, I did say "whose" instead of "who is" and all I can say in my defense is...D'OH!!!!!!!!!!

I am no lawer, but from what I've heard and read about intellectual property, telling a secret of a trick to anyone is not a violation of it. There are two types of intellectual property: copyright and patents. A secret of a tick is not subject to copyright protection (books, DVDs, VCRs and instructional videos however are), and unless the method of the trick is patented, the secret is not protected at all (otherwise we could all sue the masked magician, right?). Not revealling secrets is part of the magician's ethical code, and has nothing to do with intellectual property. I agree that telling a secret of, say, Asher Twist to someone who hasn't bought it is not moral as this will potentially reduce the amount of DVDs sold by Asher, but legally there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.

In addition to copyrights and patents, there are also trademarks. Any trick that requires an originally creative gaff should have copyright protection. That is to say, the originally created gaff should have copyright protection; not the trick itelf. It's an original expression in a tangible, fixed medium. Whether enforcing any rights that may accrue would be cost-effective is another story. There is also, perhaps, a reasonable question as to patentability on a trick that DOESN'T require a gaff. While "purely mental processes" cannot be patented, "methods (processes)" can. I imagine that a magic trick, with both a mental and physical component, could be patented. That's a process that requires application, and is almost certainly NOT worth it (as opposed to copyright, which is automatic upon creation, if the work qualifies). Also, a unique phrase as part of a trick COULD be trademarked; Basketball coach Pat Riley, for instance, has trademark protection with respect to the word "Threepeat," the winning of a sports championship in three successive years.


Posted: Mar 25, 2006 12:28am
------------------------------------------------
I think Jay Sankey should get a trademark on "chocolate-covered midgets." (The phrase, not the midgets.)

Ok, so, here is a pie in the sky idea to toss out there. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer

A few comments/ rants

A- Copyrights protect the printed or recorded word, NOT the idea. In other words, if I write a book and put a secret in it- Legally no one can copy that information as written HOWEVER- the idea is NOT protected. If someone copies the text, it is a federal offense. (Assuming they are in the USA) This is true/legal weather or not a person has registered the copyright- though proving you wrote something if it comes in to question can get dicey. An example... I can't copy the text in an encyclopedia- but I can most certainly teach that information to someone else. I can read Guerilla Marketing books, and teach those techniques- but I can't use trademarked names or quote/copy the text.

B- Patents can protect the Sale, Manufacturing and Distribution of ideas/ inventions BUT not necesarily the use of them. Ie... if someone pattents the XYZ illusion- I can't build one for you or sell it. BUT, if I build one for myself and perform it, you probably don't have a whole lot of recourse. Of course anyone can use anyone for anything- BUT if I want to make my own VELCRO I pretty much can for my own use. YES, I could be stopped via legal action but that gets expensive. I just can't sell it.

C- Trademarks are for business identity items such as names, slogans and logos- but they have naught to do with pretecting a magic idea.... Soooo

Why not form an organization, just like those who register plays etc, where one can register "intellectual magic rights" or something like that.

The trick would be that one would have to get the dealers, magic circle, IBM and SAM to buy in on it and agree to sanction, boot out, etc those who violate said rules.

I admit this is not wholey practical- or any more practical than the idea of copyrights and/or patents- but it MIGHT offer a degree of protection and reference as to who invented what.

Bottom line of course, only the Andre Kole's of the world can afford to enforce their rights in courts- so it is up to us to police our own.

With regards to the ORIGINAL post- of the guy that asked to be taught a particular commercial effect- It probably (though who knows given this individual) could have been handled by explaining that: Oh I can't teach you that trick- because it's a commercial effect still for sale by the creator. But I'd be happy to teach you how to do trick X I know with a dollar (or coin.) Or- I have a money trick I came up with I don't mind sharing. or- If you're willing to contact the originator- and ask them if it's OK, maybe they'll give you permission.

Copyright and IP laws get trampled on all the time- it's sad but it really is a self policing thing. How many performers out there use music in their shows WITHOUT paying ASCAP fees? How many folks photo copy a part of a book or magazine. Now adays almost everyone has made a copy of a music CD, Video, or DVD and given it to someone. All of these things are against the law.

In many cases, there really aren't a lot of laws that directly apply to our field since there are not a lot of other fields where the product is ONLY information, and that information is the value. Most of the things of that nature get pattented- BUT- pattents are expensive and enforcing them even more so. And of course, pattenting things just makes them public domain. You can do a patent search for levitation and come up with full schematics of Flying, Gamalo levitation and more.

So, what it comes down to, think, is a matter of teaching and encouraging integrity. We simply need to explain within our books, magazines and media the idea of integrity and promote it within our ranks, without anger or admonishments.

One of the definitions of a "culture" is that there are rules within it that are not broken SIMPLY becaue to do so would meet with disapproval of the members within that culture.

In that respect, we in America really don't have a culture since we base most standards of what is or is not OK on laws and the idea of punishment or liability.

So, perhaps, we should isn'tead promote a culture within our community.

There you go. Big smile here. Took a while to get there didn't it?

We have the Golden rule in our lager culture. Might want to start there.

Have you considered what is most precious in magic?

Hi,
I think that the real problem we have with magic dealing is that we want protection of our secrets yet at the same time we want to sell the secret. this is why the law fails to protect. once you sell the secret it is no longer a company secret!
Phillip

I'm honestly not sure whether or not lager is a misprint for larger.

Dave

Yes folks, was typo and spell checker did not catch it.

P.B. those are about three or four ideas you've almagameted into a paradox. If you split them apart you might make more progress.

Orignal post:


Funny how he thinks it is important to say that he himself would not reveal the secret to anyone. He evidently thinks that secrets of this type are not to be shared, and yet asks someone to share one. That's the main flaw in his request.

As regards whether we should teach each other tricks that one of us has paid for, it simply comes down to respecting the originator and your view on the legitimacy of the marketed trick. I don't think there are any hard and fast rules. Some dealers try to package and market tricks that are little more than simple routines that have been published before, or that rely on well-published and well-known principles. Often they pass these off as something really new, and I don't think that is right in the first place. (By the way, be sure to look out for my new packet trick coming out soon, called "Twisting the Kings" - it's a killer). I don't know for sure, but I have a feeling that "Misleading Mislead" does not fall into that category.

That better not be a rip-off of my "Twisting the Queens!"


Jack Shalom

No, it isn't. I had my idea first.