|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] | ||||||||||
Lou Hilario Inner circle 2235 Posts |
Has anyone seen or have the plans? Is this the same size and features as the licensed versions?
Magic, Illusions, Juggling, Puppet & Parrot Show ^0^
http://www.louhilario.net |
|||||||||
AmazingEARL Veteran user Tennessee, USA 350 Posts |
I have the plans, but haven't had time to study them yet. I'll let you know.
|
|||||||||
Magic Patrick Inner circle Minnesota 1591 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-10-21 08:24, John1964 wrote: John, Am I wrong but are these legit? Before you start casting stones make sure you have the facts right. If they are being sold on this sight and has the Osborne seal on them then they are legit. So for all of you ethics police, how is this unethical? Please explain this to me. BYUDAD |
|||||||||
Michael Messing Inner circle Knoxville, TN 1817 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-10-29 00:44, BYUDAD wrote: So, you're saying that putting out plans that you weren't given permission to by the originator nor the people who have manufacturing/selling rights is ethical just because it was done by Paul Osborne? How's that work? Michael |
|||||||||
hugmagic Inner circle 7655 Posts |
This is wrong. Osborne should not be publishing this effect...period.
I love it how all the guys who have recently gotten in magic have suddenly decide what is ethical and what isn't. Maybe it is jut because a lot of them want to get discounted products because they are cheap. Those of us that have worked in this business for many years, have paid a lot of money for rights to make something, developed the processes and designs to make effective illusions and effects, need to be supported in maintaining our rights to effects. I, for one, am sick of these ripoff experts and the people that support them trying to justify their theft of ideas. I know several years ago I spoke with Jim Steinmeyer. Jim was so upset about the rip off of Orgami that he was ready to stop releasing anything to magicians. You will notice that Jim has changed his marketing of his ideas to very select builders and performers. Stick to your guns, Dan. I am with you on this. Richard
Richard E. Hughes, Hughes Magic Inc., 352 N. Prospect St., Ravenna, OH 44266 (330)296-4023
www.hughesmagic.com email-hugmagic@raex.com Write direct as I will be turning off my PM's. |
|||||||||
The Mirror Images Inner circle Michigan/USA 1980 Posts |
Well looks like a lot of members here on the Café are not going to be buying from Osborne anymore..
Next illusion plans he will be coming out with is DC Fan Illusion... What is he thinking???? and WHY!?!? Best,
Steven and Michael, The Mirror Images
The MOST Identical Twin Illusionist http://www.themirrorimages.com Check out our latest new effect - Liquid Steel NEW - MotoBox NEW - MotoMation NEW - Voyager |
|||||||||
Drew Manning Special user Dallas, Texas 913 Posts |
So how then is one to know everytime if we've done the right thing?
Up until now, everyone has raved about Osborne's books and plans and how great they are, highly recommended, reputable etc. Based on everyone's raves about his other books etc, I was under the assupmtion that he was doing things "right". Is this a new turn of events? Are the older books and plans "legit"? One thing to remember is this seems to be an issue of ethics, not law. What is legal is not always ethical. Since each of us decides on our own code of ethics, this is a tough fight to win. I wish those of you with a vested interest in the outcome the best of luck in your fight.
I live my life for a layer of ice
Just like those poured by my bartender vice Any taste of vermouth would be really sublime, When you have a good martini time! -The Reverend Horton Heat |
|||||||||
Magic Patrick Inner circle Minnesota 1591 Posts |
[/quote]
So, you're saying that putting out plans that you weren't given permission to by the originator nor the people who have manufacturing/selling rights is ethical just because it was done by Paul Osborne? How's that work? Michael [/quote] Are they protected? If not then the originator was not very smart. I have bought many illusions from originators some over $4K. When I got them I had them appraised and the wooodworker said that they were not worth 1/2 that. So is it ethical to put so high a price on something that is mass produced solely because you had a great idea? Is it more unethical to buy legitimate plans that are free domain or is it more unethical to try to use ethics to corner the market on something so you can charge twice as much for? I understand that it is all about profit but nobody is throwing their hands up inthe air about the ZZ plans. In fact I know that people on the Café have even suggested them to newBs. It sounds like a case of someone who wasn't smart about protecting their Ideas trying to use ethics as a way to do so. Competition has a way of bringing prices down, this is a good thing for consumners. If you buy the legitimate plans and only build it for yourself then you are in the clear legally and ethically. |
|||||||||
Drew Manning Special user Dallas, Texas 913 Posts |
[quote="BYUDAD"]If you buy the legitimate plans and only build it for yourself then you are in the clear legally and ethically.
[/quote] I think we can all agree on that. I think the issue in this case is are the Osborne plans for this effect "legit".
I live my life for a layer of ice
Just like those poured by my bartender vice Any taste of vermouth would be really sublime, When you have a good martini time! -The Reverend Horton Heat |
|||||||||
HowardT New user 75 Posts |
Drawing plans of someone else's ideas and contributions to magic is pretty pathetic. If Paul continues
he will certainly harm his reputation and credibility in our industry. If the above post is true and plans to the interlude have been sold.. then he has already harmed his standing in our fraternity as far as I'm concerned. Does he need the money THAT bad? It's a sad day when a wonderful artist who has himself made great contributions to our craft, tosses it all away to get a $25.00 order. WHat if Puchinger wanted to publish his own plans one day and show us how to make the Illusion safely and properly? That would serve us much better than someone like Paul GUESSING on the dimensions and the construction.. that is certainly a dis service to whomever buys these plans. Do you think Paul would be bothered If someone took all his plans, hand sketched them and offered them for a quarter of the price or free? It would be legal.. Would Paul appreciate it? |
|||||||||
Drew Manning Special user Dallas, Texas 913 Posts |
Quote:
Do you think Paul would be bothered If someone took all his plans, hand sketched them and offered them for a quarter of the price or free? It would be legal.. Would Paul appreciate it? Well, I suppose one could argue that based on his logic of what is legal, he couldn't say a *** thing about it.
I live my life for a layer of ice
Just like those poured by my bartender vice Any taste of vermouth would be really sublime, When you have a good martini time! -The Reverend Horton Heat |
|||||||||
Magic Patrick Inner circle Minnesota 1591 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-10-29 09:08, hugmagic wrote: Is that why he put a book out there for the Modern Art? Why shouldn't Osborne publish these? Are they protected? We cry about people making poorly made props that expose magic yet the same people whose props are being exposed are putting the books out there for people to make (i.e. Jim Steinmeyer). So these so called ripp off experts buy the legit book and then make one legit prop (whether good or bad it is still legit) because they want to save a buck. More power to them. Why are they called ripp off artists then because they don't have a over priced prop from the originator. So is the originator of the kube zag saying that he had an original idea and that he didn't steal anyone elses ideas to develop his prop? No one is telling him about his theft of the idea. There are no original ideas, especially in magic. There are only different ways of producing them. Bottomline, if you don't protect your idea then be prepared for something like this to happen. Ethics is a slippery slope to venture on just like politics and religion. There are as many perspectives on it as there are people. So for all of you ethics police out there, attacking someone and forcing your views on them is wrong. If the originator wanted his prop protected than he should have done the smart thing and protected it. They can say why they didn't but it comes down to they were cheap and didn't want to put forth the effort or the money to protect it the right way. I mean getting a patent to protect something can be expensive using the ethics arguement to protect something is free. PS I sleep very well at night. Posted: Oct 29, 2008 10:59am Quote: On 2008-10-29 10:43, HowardT wrote: Drawing plans of someone else's ideas and contributions to magic is pretty pathetic. If Paul continues he will certainly harm his reputation and credibility in our industry. If the above post is true and plans to the interlude have been sold.. then he has already harmed his standing in our fraternity as far as I'm concerned. Does he need the money THAT bad? It's a sad day when a wonderful artist who has himself made great contributions to our craft, tosses it all away to get a $25.00 order. WHat if Puchinger wanted to publish his own plans one day and show us how to make the Illusion safely and properly? That would serve us much better than someone like Paul GUESSING on the dimensions and the construction.. that is certainly a dis service to whomever buys these plans. Do you think Paul would be bothered If someone took all his plans, hand sketched them and offered them for a quarter of the price or free? It would be legal.. Would Paul appreciate it? Puchinger should have protected it the right way then. |
|||||||||
EsnRedshirt Special user Newark, CA 895 Posts |
Byudad, woodworkers will of course appraise many illusions below what you paid for them- they're usually looking at craftsmanship and materials, and not accounting for the design process, the secret, and the performance rights.
Drew- on your "right thing" post; I'm disappointed as well with this turn of events, but I've bought enough of his plans (three sets, plus the Black Book) and don't think I really need to see anymore of his designs. It's time for me to look at other designer's blueprints to see how they think. HowardT- yes, straight copies are pretty pathetic. However, if the designer takes a concept, then runs with it off in an entirely different direction, that's how magic is expanded. To most audience member's eyes, Cube-zag and Zig-zag are different effects. They have similarities, yes, but only superficially. If I took Origami, turned it into a non-folding Rubic's cube, disassembled it into 27 pieces, and put it back together on a different table, it would essentially be a brand new illusion. I'd check with Steinmeyer before doing anything with it, of course, but I'm reasonably sure he'd have no complaints. Osborne is technically within his rights to redraw someone else's plans, but just because something's legal doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. -Erik
Self-proclaimed Jack-of-all-trades and google expert*.
* = Take any advice from this person with a grain of salt. |
|||||||||
AmazingEARL Veteran user Tennessee, USA 350 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-10-29 10:59, BYUDAD wrote: What method would you suggest? Copyright wouldn't apply. An idea cannot be copyrighted, only the "fixed expression of an idea." A blueprint or photo of the prop could be copyrighted, but the prop itself could not. Patent wouldn't apply. It would protect others from building or selling the prop, but would not prevent someone else from selling their own blueprints for it. A patent is basically a registered blueprint. You can buy a copy yourself directly from the the Patent Office...even download it for free. Trade Secret wouldn't apply. Only if it is stolen from you can trade secret be enforced in court. Legally you could figure out the recipe for CocaCola through trial and error, make it in your kitchen and sell it. You also couldn't make your trade secret available to anyone (i.e., buiding the illusion and selling one to another magician) because that would instantly negate the legal protections. If you have other suggestions, I'd be thrilled to hear them. |
|||||||||
ClintonMagus Inner circle Southwestern Southeast 3997 Posts |
BYUDAD, I don't see how putting a high price on a desirable illusion violates ethics. I also don't see how someone can "appraise" an illusion.
If you have the guts of a $50,000 BMW "appraised", they would probably be worth close to the same as the guts of a used Chevy. What makes a Mercedes cost more than a Saturn? It's the money spent on research, the attention to detail, the quality control in manufacturing and, yes, the status that goes with owning a Benz that makes the price that much higher. The same is true for illusions. The inventor typically spends many hours developing, building, redesigning, rebuilding, and tweaking until he gets it "just right". He alone knows how to build it to achieve the effect he designed it to have. Since most of the value of an original illusion lies in having not only the secret, but in having the "correct" secret and the presentation ideas, the thought and research are worth much more than the lumber, sheet metal, and the construction time. In some ways, the magic business is like golf. Golf has been called "the gentlemen's game", meaning that it is essentially self-policed. You are often alone on the course. Most professional golfers will tell you that they play against the course moreso than against the other golfers. If you kick the ball in the rough and out of view of the crowd, whether intentionally or accidentally, you are responsible for calling your own penalty. There are some, however, who violate these rules. Because much of the value of an illusion is in the secret, we must also be a self-policing group. As magicians if we don't protect one another, then certainly no one else will. Someone once said that "character is what you do when no one is looking". Character (and ethics) comes into play when we agree to "play by the rules" for the good of the group. A high price not only protects the inventor/developer, but also those performers who purchased an "exclusive". It also helps to compensate him for the time he has invested.
Things are more like they are today than they've ever been before...
|
|||||||||
Blair Marshall Inner circle Montreal, Canada 3660 Posts |
The other thing overlooked about the cost of illusions from reputable builders is that they are businesses, and as such, have overhead, and all the other additional expenses. Who do you think pays for these costs? They are covered in the price of the illusion.
Figure it out yourself. If it takes a quality builder two weeks (80 hours) to build a prop, and let's just say he wants to make 50 g a year (not a big salary for running your own business), he has to add $2000.00 to the "cost" of the prop, and this covers no overhead, expenses, or puts any profit into the business. P.S. Not sure what Paul is up to, but he sure is stirring things up!!!! P.P.S. Oh, and before we put Paul to the wall and stone him, how many here have photocopies of Pauls plans/books??? B
Visit My Facebook Fan Page At
www.Facebook.com/BlairMarshallMontrealMagician www.BlairMarshall.ca www.ShaZzamShow.com www.MontrealMagicien.com |
|||||||||
hugmagic Inner circle 7655 Posts |
BTW, the publishing of the Modern Art plans by Jim was exactly why he did it. Then he only licensed originally Owen Redwine to make it. YES, Jim's ideas are protected.
A lot of Osbornes plans are a redirection of more less standards in the business. These forementioned plans fall well outside of the common domain. Riichard
Richard E. Hughes, Hughes Magic Inc., 352 N. Prospect St., Ravenna, OH 44266 (330)296-4023
www.hughesmagic.com email-hugmagic@raex.com Write direct as I will be turning off my PM's. |
|||||||||
Michael Messing Inner circle Knoxville, TN 1817 Posts |
Quote:
You obviously don't have any idea what's involved in building illusions. First of all, a builder has to make a significant profit on each illusion sold because there is no mass production in this business. A builder is not going to sell a ton of illusions each year. The market is severely limited. Second, if you take into account the cost of the materials, the time it takes to make it properly including construction and finishing, the overhead of a workshop and tools, you'll figure out that a good mark-up is necessary to stay in business. Finally, doesn't a craftsman deserve something for all the time he has put in to developing his craft? While a woodworker may look at an illusion and say it's not worth half of what was charged, just ask him how he would go about finishing an illusion. They don't work with lacquers, they don't know how to paint a prop to make it more effective and I doubt they would have any idea what would be the best color trim to go with the main color of the prop. There's a lot more to this than just assembling a box. Also, you are correct that you legally can build an illusion for yourself from a plan whether it was authorized or not. It's also legal for Paul to put out the plan. On the other hand, legal or not, is it ethical? That's the subject of the debate. Michael |
|||||||||
Donal Chayce Inner circle 1770 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-10-29 10:35, BYUDAD wrote: Based on that reasoning, you should hope that your woodworker doesn't give you an appraisal of your house. |
|||||||||
Chezaday Inner circle Naperville, IL 1673 Posts |
Something that hasn't been mentioned is that many illusions have a fee for the "performance rights" built into the price tag. With that in mind, some of the most popular illusions have $1500-2000 added on.
A cabinet maker is not an illusion builder. They may be able to copy a simple prop but, they don't understand all the little details that go into its construction. I've worked on many of these props over the years. Only with years of experience can you truly become a master craftsman in the field of illusions. I should write a book one of these days ... Steve |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Grand illusion » » Mini Cube Zag Plan Osborne? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 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 < |