I'm confused as to what this is about? Doug can you contact me please, thanks.

Peter.

I learned yesterday that Paul Curry did, in fact, pass away in 1986.

So you inherited your moral set from your tutors?

Is this an ethical concern, or merely a personal wish? What if the script is published. I will grant you should not use someone's script, even if published, if you are taking a job and there is already a magician working there using the same script. I would love to write wonderful original scripts that merit the attention and the respect of other magicians. Although I do write some of my own scripts, many are purchased. But, I can't worry about a magician being bothered because they see me do the Don Alan Chop Cup using the script from Ron Bauer's book. I can only worry about what my spectators experience, almost none of whom have seen a chop cup routine much less the Don Alan routine.

Yes, as part of the process of peerage I accepted those morals.

Perhaps this is a parallel to our notion that pairs responsibilities and rights?

It also clearly utilizes the idea of successful procedures.

Defined, it protects the secret's work (a responsibility), passes down or shares morals successful in the protection of secrets (another responsibility), and allows the growth and development of the secret work once consent is given (a right, or a privilige, depending on the decision.)

Does anyone know if Curry or his estate got any money from the other marketed variations (in books or as effects) of OOTW? Or if a magic store sells his version, as a manuscript say, does his estate get money?

If not, should he/they get/have gotten money?

I find it interesting that many complain about giving secrets away, but if one sells the secrets, it's rarely questioned.

I question it. I wonder how we can complain about joe greedyperson selling secrets that are not his, when we expound on the virtue of Daryl doing the same. I for one am extremely thankful for Daryl's DVDs. However, the tapes are not much more than a explanation of others published work, others who I may add, are not all passed away (While they are mentioned as creators, is that enough?). If we put our works out in the open, we subject ourselves to this. Right and wrong are often left up to the individual even if society as a whole may shun it collectively. In fact if it weren't for this forum, I myself would have never realized the problem with some of the things that are major thorns in the side of respected folk like Mr. Palmer and Mr. Townsend. It is undoubtedly easier to learn secrets than ethics, at least at this point in history. Secrets are for sale at $35.00 for 20 and can be found at most bookstores and everywhere on the net. If what Weird Al does with music were done with magic there would be anger, and it would be legal. Unhappily, the only way for us to protect the magic that is ours is to keep it hidden, thereby making it less magical.

I guess the real beginning of this conversation should be to understand what we want. Next would be finding out what we are willing to settle for. Who's livelihood takes precedence, Creators? Workers? shops? Profit is lessened when you only sell 20 books rather than 2000, but the secret is safer. So the creators and shops lose, but the workers win, except they will probably pay much more for the secret. Should magic include the new guy who wants to learn? Thank god it did when I started, I had to work hard to find it, but it was there. Only now many years after I started am I developing routines and Ideas that are "mine". One day I believe that my start, rocky as it has been, will benefit magic.

I am certain there are a lot more folk like me who are learning magic without the aid of mentors and such, how do we even reach them with our concerns? Unless they stumble on this site how can they know what we feel? I am sorry for the rambling, next time I write something this long I will need an outline handy.

Hi Jonathan Townsend.

Having known many magicians that were past masters of the magic art and used to perform magic on television one of the ways that helped get them on TV was the fact that they were great. But they also were different and did their own stuff.

I knew Don Alan, Jack Pyle and Billy Bishop quite well.

They all did magic that a lot of other people did but they also did a lot of their own stuff that they did not publish.

Well when a performer works on TV and in front of audiences magicians see their routines and copy them. My Father came up with his rope tie. He won the Houdini award for it at one of the PCAM conventions in Reno. People ripped it off because it was good.

The only way I feel that there is to protect an original routine or a magic effect from it getting ripped off by magicians is not to ever perform it for an audience.

But that is not what earns a magician money by keeping his or her most original stuff and his or her trade mark effects to themselves. When a magician performs an original effect on TV other magicians see it - video tape it - and work the routine out.

There is nothing that anyone can do about it. The best way to protect your own stuff is to publish it. That doesn't make that much money for the magician. And people in magic will still rip off any good idea. But at least publishing the ideas gets your name connected to your ideas.

At least that is something!

Josh:

You make a good point. Daryl is not the only one selling books or DVDs with secrets created by others. And there's not necessarily anything wrong with that, but I think there is a double standard. I hear people hear get upset about giving secrets away, but selling them for a profit doesn't seem to be an issue for many.

Who has a right to reveal or sell secrets created by others? Who does not have that right? Is it ethical for anyone to sell secrets as long as they attribute the inventor? When, if ever, should royalties be paid?

If it's OK to reveal/sell older effects, where do you draw the line (how old)?

Part of this goes back to permissions. In the English edition of Final Curtain Borodin and I want to include some extra material. One of these items we want to use is based upon an idea from Deddy Corbuzier. I wasn't sure how to reach him, so I tried the e-mail contact on his web site.

Not only was he generous enough to give us permission, he revealed that he was a big fan of Borodin.

Regarding scripts that belong to other people -- if you purchase the item, and the script is included, you have the right to use it. Now here's the sting -- if you do use the same script everyone else is using, it makes you look like a hack.

The possible exception is if you are doing an historical recreation of a particular performer and you are doing his script.

Then it becomes a tribute.

There is a fellow in Dallas who does a beautiful impression of Harry Blackstone Jr. He does the dancing hank and the bird cage. He is adding pieces one at a time. It was fun watching him at the TAOM in 2000.