|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] | ||||||||||
Pete Biro 1933 - 2018 18558 Posts |
It is like seeing a play, recording or memorizing it, then doing the play without permission. The theatrical and music world has serious people keeping track of this kind of activity, but sadly, magic is too small a community to afford to do this.
Bottom line? It is stealing someone's intellectual property. An example of doing it right is to buy the Dai Vernon book on Cups and Balls and learn that. It is the legal and moral way. Now if you can improvise and add your own work to Vernon's that is fine.
STAY TOONED... @ www.pete-biro.com
|
|||||||||
walid ahumada Special user sinaloa, mexico 892 Posts |
Is it unethical to use a comedian's joke at a party?
“Magic becomes art when it has nothing to hide.” BEN OKRI quote
|
|||||||||
Keith Mitchell Special user 799 Posts |
I did research on Copyright laws and learned that it originated in the UK. Back then the buildings were all the same out of fear of whatever life was like back then. So with the new copyright laws, they were finally allowed to designed something new and different without being socially attacked.
Today, copyright laws is about protecting someone's elses original ideas, therefore billions of people are forced to come up with their own. Microsoft says that you DO NOT own the software that is purchase, but you do own the license to USE IT on your computer only. Linux encourages you go ahead and design a new Linux Operating System as long as you provide the Open Source of that Operating System. Their way of saying they hate Microsoft. Some magician or C&Ballers here at the Magic Café had sold their C&B routine on-line and then decide to discontinue selling in order to keep that routine to themselves. These guys don't want anything to do with people that have already brought their routine, and are being a little snobbish about it. To those who have done this, I will not be using your routine nor will I be sharing any of the secrets involved. It is a strange world we live in. One thing that is absolute in magic is that EXPOSURE is a NO-NO! Now I have spent time reading what people are saying on this topic and I myself had said some things about this guy. Because of Topics like this I am too scared to perform even if it was my own routine. People here are Harsh, so where do I begin to develope my own talent without being shot down? I do buy routines from different sources in hopes that one day I will have my own routine that I can be proud of. There might be a day when I will have to share my routine on film and ask for CONSTRUCTIVE critique to help improve my Magic, but I get the feeling that it is going to be another Gong Show. It appears here that there was no PERMISSION to use J Lattimore's routine, and someone might be needing a lawyer sometime soon. I wonder how J Lattimore came up with his routine, did he get permission if needed? Are we condeming this guy for trying his best to perform C&B or for stealing another's routine? Where do we draw the line? Maybe we should let J Lattimore answer these questions, I don't want to be part of a Lynch Mob. |
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
Copyright only pertains to the written word I think video falls under copyright too but I'm not sure. What we are talking about here is intellectual property. There are laws for that as well. But as was said Magic is such a small part of the world it is hard to get that protection. The bottom line is this no matter what.
If a magic effect, or routine has not been released no one has any right to use it unless they are given permission to do so regardless if it's protected by law or not. If you don't have permission your in the wrong pure and simple there is no gray area. You have permission from owning the book, vid, being taught by the one that came up by it etc... if you don't have any of those your stealing. |
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-12-28 14:43, walid ahumada wrote: If you don't have permission from the comedian to use it, you have stolen it. Having said that the problem is with comedy there is the same problem comedian's steal from each other too. So what you may have heard may have already been lifted from someone else. Maybe not but there's a good chance it was. Ethics are sadly lacking in many places. |
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24312 Posts |
The attempt to explain copyright and/or other intellectual property laws in a few paragraphs, the legalities of the situation have become quite muddled.
There was a major change in copyright laws that went into effect in 1978. Among the changes was the lack of a requirement of registration. Before the law went into effect, if you performed a joke in public, without actually writing it down and having it copyrighted, or without having it copyrighted as part of a play or a story, it went directly into the public domain. Note: "public domain" does not mean that the public can view it. It means that the item is out of copyright and is non-copyrightable. Members of the Writers' Guild routinely copyright their material or the people they write it for do. Some people argue that you can't copyright a magic trick or a magic routine. If you videotape it yourself and put all the proper notices on it, there is a mechanism that will allow you to copyright the videotape. How much protection that gives the owner of the routine under the law is debatable. The US copyright laws underwent very few changes from their inception until 1976, when the law that went into effect in 1978 was written. Since then, there have been many major changes in the law. It's in a constant state of flux. As it stands, if you want to perform something you have seen in front of your friends or your family, chances are that nobody can or will do anything about it. But if you post it on YouTube and you don't have the right to perform it, then you will be setting yourself up for the same kind of trouble that the idiot children who tape themselves vandalizing the property of others, and post the video on YouTube or MySpace. Regarding people who sell a limited quantity of their own routines, it's understandable. If you ask nicely, sometimes they will sell another copy.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
edh Inner circle 4698 Posts |
Quote:
Its funny how some ripoffs are overlooked or considered "ok" while others are branded as illegal and immoral ripoffs. It also depends on who is doing the copying. BTW wasn't it Penn & Teller the first to do this with clear cups?
Magic is a vanishing art.
|
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24312 Posts |
I don't know enough about the Telelthought Wallet and the Outlaw Wallet to make an educated comment; however, considering the various and sundry gaffed wallets that have been used to obtain secret information, many of them go back to earlier sources. For example, a number of the "new" wallets on the market are based on the Jaks wallet. That doesn't make either of these right or wrong, by the way.
Regarding the Sherwood cups vs, The Princess cups: there were many, many comments about these cups. What the original poster of this comment did not know was all of the behind the scenes comments that went back and forth concerning what should and should not be done. There were, to the best of my knowledge, only a dozen of the Princess cup sets manufactured. However, even before they were manufactured, accusations went back and forth about RnT II's Foxy II.V cups. They were closer to a set of Harry Stanley cups than anything else. Some people expected me to comment more in public about what I thought was going on. What all of you must realize is that due to my unique position in the world of cups and balls, I am often called upon to moderate issues like this behind the scenes. It would not only be out of place for me to air someone else's dirty laundry here, but in some cases, it would be a violation of a confidentiality agreement. Regarding the clear cups: while Penn and Teller were certainly early performers of the cups and balls with clear cups, their goal with the routine was not to fool or mystify, but to expose. There was one routine that is actually earlier, which was published by Micky Hades. There is also a routine that has not been published, by Terry Holley, that will fool all of you. Jason Latimer's routine is intended to fool, mystify and entertain, and it does not resemble any of the above routines when performed. This illustrates another aspect of intellectual property law. You cannot protect a concept. It is specifically forbidden in the US copyright and patent laws. Concepts are ephemeral. They are not focused. They exist only in the mind. Only the physical manifestations of concepts are protectable. Drawings, photographs, props, etc. Those are copyrightable or patentable. BTW, the idea that only the written word is protectable by copyright is a misconception. Music is copyrightable. In fact, now you don't even need to submit a sheet music copy. A recording will suffice. Movies, Videos and photographs are copyrightable. Drawings are copyrightable. Sculpture is copyrightable. Jewelry designs are copyrightable. And so are microchips. The reason? All microchips start out as a photograph or a series of photographs. These are copyrighted. Copyrights start the moment that the artist creates the work and puts it into a physical form. Registration is needed only if the artist wants to verify when something was created.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
pepka Inner circle Uh, I'm the one on the right. 5041 Posts |
All of this brings to mind a French magician many years ago who stole Copperfield's flying routine. As many of you know, the mechanism for this has been patented by John Gaughan. Now, I believe other magicians have utilized the same mechanics, but to different effect. Rick Thomas for one. This guy however, used signature moves and music that David had been using for years. If I recall correctly, there was a huge article in Magic Magazine about this guy and he actually was sued and David got him to stop doing it. It really sounds like this was a landmark case in this area. Of course, Jason probably doesn't have David's attorney, or money. Does anyone else remember this?
|
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24312 Posts |
I don't recall this at all. I know that Johnny Gaughan owns the patent. Rick's routine uses only part of it. Basically, the part that Foy never patented.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
Bill Thank you for the information on copyright I think that is very help full to us all.
|
|||||||||
yin_howe Special user Malaysia 981 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-12-27 16:51, madkiki wrote: Pardon my asking, but whats wrong with this?
"Talent without passion is talent wasted.."
https://www.youtube.com/user/yinhowe80/ |
|||||||||
pepka Inner circle Uh, I'm the one on the right. 5041 Posts |
It's tacky. Isn't that enough?
|
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
Well something good came of this thread! The video in question has been removed. So that is a start and a good thing!:)
I also received 3 nasty reply from this guy about My comments on his vids. I guess that shows the class of this guy and his act. I can understand his being upset over someone saying a couple of his vids were not that good but to respond in such crass ways shows his lack of a lot of things. |
|||||||||
doublelift Veteran user 342 Posts |
Hey I learned a new word! Coprolite! Whooo hoo. Thanks Bill!
So let me ask this just for general knowledge. If I buy a DVD or book with a published routine. Does that imply rights to perform it by ownership of the DVD or book? If I sold the DVD or book do I no longer have legal use or does pulication move it into some gray public domain area? |
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
When you buy a book dvd etc. you have the rights then to use whatever you feel you want to use from it. Sometimes t.v. performance rights are reserved but anything other then that it's all yours. I'm not sure about once an item is sold I would think that it still be ok to use said items but that again depends on who you ask I'm sure.
|
|||||||||
DJG Inner circle The northern hemisphere of Earth 1295 Posts |
...and that's where I have issues. If I buy a book, effect or DVD I have the right to perform it how, where and when I want - TV rights reserved or not. I do not believe there is any legal issues here, but I may be wrong.
If you don't want people performing your creations, don't sell material teaching them. again IMHO...
Your choices in life can be compared to watching a magic trick: You can continue to believe the illusion in front of you, find the intrigue and desire to learn more, or quit paying attention the moment you feel deceived.
|
|||||||||
MickeyPainless Inner circle California 6065 Posts |
DJG,
I think it was stated early on in the topic that Jason had not released his routine! |
|||||||||
TheAmbitiousCard Eternal Order Northern California 13425 Posts |
If you buy the book, dvd, etc. does not always mean you have the rights to perform it.
genii published a routine and when I asked the author if performance rights were granted, he told me..."NO". that's just one example. and I'm pretty sure that Mickey is right. latamer's routine is not published. why would you want to do it anyway. make your own routine.
www.theambitiouscard.com Hand Crafted Magic
Trophy Husband, Father of the Year Candidate, Chippendale's Dancer applicant, Unofficial World Record Holder. |
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24312 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-12-30 22:49, DJG wrote: No, you don't. It's not like sheet music or recordings. The basic difference lies in the fact that with sheet music and/or recordings, there is a royalty gathering or licensing mechanism that guarantees that performances in profit-making venues pay royalties to the creator of the piece. That's what ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, RIAA, etc. do. Magicians don't have any of that. When Bruce Cervon taught his all-around square-up pass, he restricted the use of it in live performance to your practice room. He didn't want people doing it at the Castle or anywhere else, probably because they would mess it up. Nobody called his hand on it, probably because nobody wanted to put the time in on it. But here's the catch. With most of the people I know, Cervon excluded, of course, if you ask for permission to perform it on television, they will grant it. But that is for the routine AS PUBLISHED, not for the routine as learned from them when you saw them do it in live performance. Sometimes, the guys who write their material up do not put all the bits of business into the published version.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Ever so sleightly » » Someone doing Latimer's Routine (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 0.05 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 < |