The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » What are 'credits' and to what extent should they be used? (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5 [Next]
entity
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
5060 Posts

Profile of entity
*sigh*

Let's deal with your comments, as plainly as possible:

Quote:
On 2008-01-13 17:12, Arnon wrote:

entity:

You have made incorrect assumptions, have contradicted yourself on your posts and your PMs with me, and have made some flat-out incorrect statements.

It would take me over an hour to go into each and every one, and so I won't.


Then don't make such sweeping accusations on a public forum, unless you are willing to back up your statements. This would be better done by PM, but since you've chosen to attack my honesty and integrity publicly, I'll respond publicly. I apologize to all those who find this as dreary as I do.

On 2008-01-13 17:12, Arnon wrote:
Quote:
1) You PM'd to me that "The first email communication I received from Patrick Redford detailing briefly the disagreement he was having with Jerome was sent to me
Jan.12th at 4:43 am. which means I wouldn't have read it until later that morning, probably around 10:00 a.m. on Jan. 12th."


Thank you for sharing my PRIVATE MESSAGE publicly, Arnon. It's not a huge deal, as I have nothing to hide, but you should know better, really.

[quote]On 2008-01-13 17:12, Arnon wrote:
However, you posted the following on this thread:
Quote:
On 2008-01-12 12:06, entity wrote:
"Reference" seems a good fit.

Question: I'm told that following -- There is a high profile item about to go to market, wherein the author has borrowed heavily from an unpublished work of someone else. The new author asked for permission, apparently, and permission was denied to use the originators work. The new author has decided to publish anyway, crediting the original author.

Comments?

- entity


and then, after my "blueprint" post, you posted:

Quote:
On 2008-01-12 15:28, entity wrote:
Arnon: How do you feel, given the above, about an author or creator building upon another person's unpublished material in Mentalism or Magic, without that person's permission?

What is the commonly acknowledged practice in law?

- entity


Therefore, possibly the first, but surely the second of the above posts were written AFTER you had received the email making you aware of the Jerome/Patrick dispute.

Hence you HAD tried to "set me up," contrary to your denials.

Why would I try to set you up? At the time that I made that post, I hadn't even read Jerome's manuscript and was UNAWARE THAT YOU WERE EVEN INVOLVED. So what would I have been setting you up FOR, exactly?

You've ignored that fact that in my private email I pointed out the fact that I had made a post or two on this thread, early on, BEFORE I was aware of the problems with Jerome and Patrick, commenting upon my feelings that unpublished works should not be used by others without the creators permission. In the second post you've quoted above, AS I EXPLAINED TO YOU IN MY PM (but which you've conveniently left out) I was referring both to my prior posts and to your posted "blueprint" (which I called a list of criteria -- forgive me) which included one notation about using unpublished works of others. What I wrote at that time had nothing to do, in my mind, with Jerome and Patrick's disagreement. It referred to your list. I told you that in my PM, too.

Quote:
On 2008-01-13 17:12, Arnon wrote:
2) I will also point out this one incorrect assumption you had made:

Quote:
On 2008-01-12 22:38, entity wrote:
Quote:
***
In that post I made my "reference" remark, agreeing with the post before mine.

In your response to that post, Arnon, you listed a number of criteria for giving credit.
***
- entity


INCORRECT!

I did not list "a number of criteria for giving credit" but rather, a blueprint of a "List of Sources":

I was setting forth terminology or a list of classifications, not, as you had assumed, a pecking order for all sources that ethically should be credited as a basis for the "current work."


I stand corrected.

On 2008-01-13 17:12, Arnon wrote:
3) I've already pointed out that your judgment was without a proper basis, which you have re-characterized as your "deduction." Whatever you choose to call it, your decision that "if they'd said 'no' after being specifically asked, that should have been that" was without even knowing what had been asked by Jerome of George. You have conceded that already. Whatever you want to call it, it was flat-out incorrect and you were jumping to conclusions based on inadequate information and unwarranted inferences.


I've responded to that in my prior post answering your questions. You've chosen to ignore what I said and put in your own interpretations.

Quote:
On 2008-01-13 17:12, Arnon wrote:

The probability that I will owe you an apology, for anything I have said, is plunging.

Arnon


The chances that you are willing to show the character necessary to apologize seem to be plunging, I'd have to agree.

In your previous post, Arnon, you said that if this were a lawsuit, I'd have many more questions to answer. If this were a lawsuit, you'd be thrown out of here on your ass. I chose not to say this then, out of friendship and respect for your profession as an attorney, but since you've chosen to publicly question my integrity in this matter, I'll say this now. What you have chosen not to tell people here is that you have a direct conflict of interest in this matter. You are one of the contributors to Jerome's book. You benefit (ego and reputation-wise, if not financially) from seeing it come out without attending contraversy against it. That seems to be why you post such vitriolic, hyperbolic, muck-throwing nonsense about my posts here that attempt to get at the truth. You presume to know what goes on in my mind and in my heart. You don't. Your posts in this thread seem, in my opinion, to be transparently mired in your own self-interest.

I have no desire to blacken anyone's name or to "go after" anyone here, or to set you or anyone else up. I had inside information that I thought was relative to the argument, information that you don't have, Arnon. I chose to speak up about that. If it has helped Jerome and Patrick to sort things out behind the scenes, I'm glad.

- entity
entity
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
5060 Posts

Profile of entity
Spektor: I've always thought you were.

- entity
Arnon
View Profile
Inner circle
1320 Posts

Profile of Arnon
Entity/Tom:

You wrote:

Quote:
In the second post you've quoted above, AS I EXPLAINED TO YOU IN MY PM (but which you've conveniently left out) I was referring both to my prior posts and to your posted "blueprint" (which I called a list of criteria -- forgive me) which included one notation about using unpublished works of others. What I wrote at that time had nothing to do, in my mind, with Jerome and Patrick's disagreement.


Go ahead and call me a "wanna-be real mindreader," but it is incomprehensible to me that you did not have Jerome and Patrick's disagreement in your mind at the time of your second-quoted post.

Here's the evidence:

> You PM'd me that you had probably read Patrick's email notifying you of the dispute on January 12 at around 10 am. (That was not confidential - what's the fuss? I'm barred from posting it simply because you PM'd it to me? Balderdash!)

> You posted what I call "your setup question" to me "On 2008-01-12 15:28" according to the Café. That would be on the same day, January 12, at 3:28 pm (EST). Oakville, Ontario, Canada time would also have been that day at 3:38 pm.

> Thus you had already read Patrick's email about the dispute a little over 5-1/2 hours before you posted your "setup question" to me.

> It is inconceivable to me that you did not have the dispute in mind when you "innocently" posed the "setup question" to me.

The dispute and your question share the same subject matter according to your view of the circumstances - how could you not have had the dispute in mind?

My very happy involvement with The Thought Channel was disclosed publicly on this forum in a thread that was deleted. I would never represent anyone if a lawsuit were filed in this dispute, (which I don't believe could happen without a prompt dismissal), because of that very involvement that I enjoy. I didn't fail to disclose it - I was publicly praised for it by Tony Eye, in one instance. Are you trying to make me seem malevolent in concealing a conflict of interest? Shame on you once again!

That's enough for now - this is too tedious, even for me, and surely even more boring to others that may be reading this.

But Mr. Baxter, you've got some 'splainin' to do.

Arnon
entity
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
5060 Posts

Profile of entity
If you can't conceive that someone might be telling the truth and be able to separate one specific issue from an over-all discussion of ethics, then that says more about you than it does about me.

Believe what you want, Arnon.

- entity
Arnon
View Profile
Inner circle
1320 Posts

Profile of Arnon
Quote:
On 2008-01-13 19:15, entity wrote:
Believe what you want, Arnon.

- entity


That's the best you can do?
Lord Of The Horses
View Profile
Inner circle
5410 Posts

Profile of Lord Of The Horses
Quote:
On 2008-01-13 18:08, entity wrote:

What you have chosen not to tell people here is that you have a direct conflict of interest in this matter. You are one of the contributors to Jerome's book. You benefit (ego and reputation-wise, if not financially) from seeing it come out without attending contraversy against it.


Thomas,

I don't know about Arnon's "conflict of interest" but without speaking for him, I also shared with Jerome MY version for performing an effect like that one.

But, personally speaking, I don't feel I have any "conflict of interest" because in my case, I just happened to share my findings on this particular subject with Jerome only because he was the only one who spoke with me about something similar he demonstrated live to a bunch of other performers, and I told him my way to do that - and that he could include it in any book of his choice or in his performance.

Nothing I knew about the fact that Patrick had came up with the same, exact ideas that Jerome had (or that one of them "stole" the ideas from the other, if we have to believe the accusations that both gentlemen throw at each other) because even if I and Patrick have had some few exchanges of mails during the years, he never shared anything like that with me. His choice, of course.

But, do you really believe that if Patrick, years ago (or even one day before Jerome spoke up to me) chose to share with me some of his insights on this kind of routines, I would not have shared back to him my ideas and findings on that, as I did to Jerome?

But, yes, I'm not Arnon.

However, I would believe that Arnon is smarter than that, and not really thinking that such a controversy really help his name big time, plus he sure has other better things to do than that, in his life. Smile
Then you'll rise right before my eyes, on wings that fill the sky, like a phoenix rising!
Dr Spektor
View Profile
Eternal Order
Carcosa
10574 Posts

Profile of Dr Spektor
I am Joe's Burning Indigestion

(Ok - who spotted that reference? There will be more I am Joe's (X) comments as this thread continues.)
"They are lean and athirst!!!!"
Lord Of The Horses
View Profile
Inner circle
5410 Posts

Profile of Lord Of The Horses
Joe Cool?
Then you'll rise right before my eyes, on wings that fill the sky, like a phoenix rising!
entity
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
5060 Posts

Profile of entity
I would believe you, Paolo.

Neither Jerome nor Patrick have said anything to me about one having stolen their ideas from the other. Both have been surprisingly civil towards each other when speaking with me.

Yes, Arnon. That's the best I can do.

- entity
Arnon
View Profile
Inner circle
1320 Posts

Profile of Arnon
I'd like to know who helped vanish the original thread, "Are you ready for a NEW sensation?" that had been started by Paolo?

Could it be the guy with the new, improved avatar?

Arnon

P.S. I think that his forehead is still too large.
Lord Of The Horses
View Profile
Inner circle
5410 Posts

Profile of Lord Of The Horses
Quote:
On 2008-01-13 21:39, Arnon wrote:
I'd like to know who helped vanish the original thread, "Are you ready for a NEW sensation?" that had been started by Paolo?

Could it be the guy with the new, improved avatar?

Arnon

P.S. I think that his forehead is still too large.


Arnon,

Does that really matters?

Yes, in line of principle may still matter, but since Jerome apparently decided to stop selling his e-book, a thread like that one would be pointless now.

Don't you agree?
Then you'll rise right before my eyes, on wings that fill the sky, like a phoenix rising!
Lord Of The Horses
View Profile
Inner circle
5410 Posts

Profile of Lord Of The Horses
However, Tom Cutts, kindly informed me that the thread in question is still alive.

It was just purified from some UNCALLED ATTACKS to Jerome!
Then you'll rise right before my eyes, on wings that fill the sky, like a phoenix rising!
Arnon
View Profile
Inner circle
1320 Posts

Profile of Arnon
Quote:
On 2008-01-13 18:08, entity wrote:
***
In your previous post, Arnon, you said that if this were a lawsuit, I'd have many more questions to answer. If this were a lawsuit, you'd be thrown out of here on your ass. I chose not to say this then, out of friendship and respect for your profession as an attorney, but since you've chosen to publicly question my integrity in this matter, I'll say this now. What you have chosen not to tell people here is that you have a direct conflict of interest in this matter. You are one of the contributors to Jerome's book.
***
- entity


Entity, your "revelation" of my being one of the contributors was nothing new. You posted the above on January 13th, and this entire thread wasn't started until January 11th.

However, the day before, Jerome posted this on the "New Sensation" thread that later inexplicably disappeared:

Quote:
On 2008-01-10 17:21, TT2 wrote:
This is one of my signature effects, "The Thought Channel" and is a propless, gaffless, impromptu demonstration of direct mind reading.

With contributions from Paolo Cavalli, Paul Vigil, idea's inspired by Armando Lucero and insights from our own Arnon (the Bulldog) Sincoff, "Thought Channel" is something I hope makes a lot of people very happy. It's certainly been good to me.

I've performed this live for Max Maven, Michael Weber, Eric Mead, Armando Lucero, Paul Vigil, Lincoln, Joey Burton, Jason Scott, Randy Malcolm, Sean Bott, Brian Voiles and a host of other great thinkers and performers I've been honored to know and share my work with.

Most of the above have seen MULTIPLE performances of this piece and had tremendous things to say about it. Richard Osterlind gave the most recent quote and endorsement for my work and for that I'm extremely grateful.

"Thought Channel" is a routine that will appear in "The Sumerian Mosaic" book with Paolo Cavalli. I'm doing this one pre-release to help with the costs of editing and printing and to help those interested in our work get a feel for the material contained within that book.

This is a 20 page manuscript and will be available in a protected/encoded PDF file sometime this weekend or early next week. I'm off to talk with Steve Brooks about getting an ad/banner on the forum so we may continue to support the Café and give back to Pennies while promoting this work and "The Sumerian Mosaic."

In the meantime please feel free to PM me with your questions. I will probably let 50 of these go - price is still in the air at this point.

All my best,
Jerome Finley


Please note, if you hadn't already, that my status as a contributor was clearly disclosed. Your innuendo that I had concealed that fact is wholly unwarranted and it is I who deserve an apology from you.

Arnon
Lord Of The Horses
View Profile
Inner circle
5410 Posts

Profile of Lord Of The Horses
True, Arnon.

Jerome, clearly mentioned you name among the others. Smile

And now - because the thread is back - anyone can check that FOR THEMSELVES, if in doubt.
Then you'll rise right before my eyes, on wings that fill the sky, like a phoenix rising!
entity
View Profile
Inner circle
Canada
5060 Posts

Profile of entity
It was disclosed on a thread that didn't exist at the time of my statement. I hadn't read it, and you didn't mention it here, when this was the only thread that existed dealing with the topic.

In a court of law, you'd have been tossed on your ass for a conflict of interest.

You know it and I know it.

Strange when you choose to abuse someone for telling the truth, but claim you need an apology for keeping it hidden.

This is my last statement on the subject. I'm told that behind the scenes the parties involved are working to sort things out. I wish them luck.

- entity
Arnon
View Profile
Inner circle
1320 Posts

Profile of Arnon
Entity/Tom:

I've already stated, in this thread, that I would never represent a party should a lawsuit be filed, which in my opinion, would be summarily dismissed anyway.
Tony Iacoviello
View Profile
Eternal Order
13144 Posts

Profile of Tony Iacoviello
Quote:
On 2008-01-13 21:23, entity wrote:
...

Neither Jerome nor Patrick have said anything to me about one having stolen their ideas from the other. Both have been surprisingly civil towards each other when speaking with me.



Then why is all the BS being flung, and why was it flung in the first place?
For goodness sakes people, and some wonder by people leave here?

Be good to each other (my last suggestion here)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bG6b3V2MNxQ
cmwalden
View Profile
Regular user
Cedar Park, TX
150 Posts

Profile of cmwalden
Wow! I didn't mean to read most of this but it was like a severed head sitting on the sidewalk.

Every time I read something like this it is a complete antidote to any desire I might have to publish magic material. I think I'd rather run for president!
"There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in our reality."

- William Shakespeare
Magic Spank
View Profile
Veteran user
Las Vegas
320 Posts

Profile of Magic Spank
In my opinion the fact that something has been published does not make it public domain. It's exactly the opposite. People publish things to establish their ownership of it, whether it's in a book or a magic publication like the linking ring.

The proper thing to do is to contact the person who originated the published material and ask permission if you want to publish a variation or improvement on it.

Ideally, the improvement or variation should be given to the originator of the idea to publish at their discretion. Unfortunately greed is usually factored in so that rarely happens.

Writers don't compile parts of other popular books to make novels. Unless you have something truly original to offer you shouldn't be thinking about marketing anyway. There's more than enough rehashed stuff out there.

Just one persons opinion. Old school maybe. The opinions of others may differ but make no mistake, there is no "in crowd" who can give you carte blanche to use other people's material. It is up to the person who originated it alone.
Tone
View Profile
Elite user
The Secret Theater
420 Posts

Profile of Tone
Questions-

If I email my own routines to myself, will I retain credit for originating the methods?

If no one else ever reads the original methods, how is possible to maintain any ownership?

If the methods/effects remain unpublished, how can I claim them to be "mine"?

Very twisty road
╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏͋͏╪ͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥͥ
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » What are 'credits' and to what extent should they be used? (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.36 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL