|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
Tom Jorgenson Inner circle LOOSE ANGLES, CALIFORNIA 4451 Posts |
On 2011-01-18 14:13, duanebarry wrote:
- Should the community grant a creator exclusive control of a published move? He's not demanding exclusive control, he's requiring that you actually purchase the method first, and is only asking control over its further publication. He's not demanding control over how you do it, when , where, patter, or how you tweak it. I'm thinking this thread should have a question or statement or two added each month to keep it current. I appreciate knowing the process to obtain permission.
We dance an invisible dance to music they cannot hear.
|
|||||||||
Sid Helkule Inner circle Australia 1481 Posts |
After reading some of these repsonses, I think I've worked out why we don't see Millard on the Café too often these days.
|
|||||||||
Tony Iacoviello Eternal Order 13151 Posts |
It is sad to read that people here cannot accept how a creator wishes to control republicstio of his intellectual propert, property that is still commercially available.
|
|||||||||
Dr Spektor Eternal Order Carcanis 10781 Posts |
It boils down to this:
A person creates something and publishes it. There is no way to control who uses it afterwards. However, ethics and morals.... not copyright and patents are involved here as others have said. The creator says "I would ask that if you use my technique to ask me and credit me" You can ignore it and do it anyway - and may the wrath of the mystery community rip your soul apart. But there are so many rip off artists around, copies, Share-PDFs and so on - people have forgotten perhaps you have dipped into darkness. I ask persmission of various things - and turned down like Chris T. has... that is life. Do as thou wilst - and reap the rewards and consequences. Oh my fav line from many "creators" springing up ...."I indy invented the peek - it is true I have 3 days experience in the field but I'm a friggin' genius.... so I filmed this shaky Youtube video and selling it.... research? I didn't do research? How could I? there is SOOOOO much out there.... it isn't reasonable to expect anyone to do research,,, ask someone in the field with experience???? Nah, they would be jealous and lie anyway.... and besides... I invented it... its mine! I call it the Base-us Secundus...." Sad thing is... these freaks are like the heads of a hydra... chop one down 2 spring up...
"They are lean and athirst!!!!"
|
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
It's really simple.
Millard invented AN. Millard has published and sells the method. Others have attempted to release the same move and sell it for a profit without Millard's permission. That is theft. |
|||||||||
tkahng Regular user 102 Posts |
Camille
millard gives us 6 condition in which permission may be granted. Not all of them require you to own his specific product. Acidus novus was a breakthrough method that gained so much popularity that its has become easily available to anybody to the point where it has been ripped off all over. How would you feel if your breakthrough method later surfaced as something in the line of The Revelation Technique. I think that millards conditions are reasonable, especially for the advancement of our art, as camille, you have stated. If we do not get the story right we end up with a convoluted history and without the limitation of the flow this knowledge, we will have more exposure, rendering the peek useless. that's not advancement of our art. that's declination of our art. |
|||||||||
robwar0100 Inner circle Buy me some newspapers.Purchase for me 1 Gazette and 1747 Posts |
All of this discussion about Acidus Novus prompted me to check out my Easy to Master Mentalism Series with Richard Osterlind and check out Acidus Plus. It's neat how a pen and an index card (along with a skilled performer) can create a sense of awe and wonder.
Bobby
"My definition of chance is my hands on the wheel," Greg Long.
|
|||||||||
seadog93 Inner circle 3200 Posts |
I'm surprised the request was in any way viewed as controversial.
Own the product, contribute to it, don't undermine it by giving it away and give the creator a copy. More than fair.
"Love is the magician who pulls man out of his own hat" - Ben Hecht
"Love says 'I am everything.' Wisdom says 'I am nothing'. Between the two, my life flows." -Nisargadatta Maharaj Seadog=C-Dawg=C.ou.rtn.ey Kol.b |
|||||||||
robwar0100 Inner circle Buy me some newspapers.Purchase for me 1 Gazette and 1747 Posts |
Well said, Sea Dog. Glad to see you have your sea legs.
Bobby
"My definition of chance is my hands on the wheel," Greg Long.
|
|||||||||
edh Inner circle 4698 Posts |
I happen to agree with you. If you cannot create based on others then we are lost. Credit those who came before and that should be enough!
think about this: there has been enourmauos(sp) amount of weapons technology in the past few years. this technlogy wouldn't be abvailable if it wasn't built upon what is existing now! Or what was dream't of while we were sleeping. edh
Magic is a vanishing art.
|
|||||||||
EscapeMaster Loyal user 296 Posts |
I have not bought or ever seen a copy of Acidus Novus. I know and use a few ways of reading a folded billet without unfolding it - if you spend time playing with folded business cards it's quite easy to come up with them - and there aren't really that many ways it can be achieved.
If I ever want to describe one of my methods do I have to buy Acidus Novus to check it's not the same? Say I ask a friend and he tells me that this IS Acidus Novus. My peek is definitely independent creation. Do I still have to buy a $150 to describe in my own manuscript something I came up with myself? People publish 'indepentally created' routines the whole time - just look at the switches in Switchcraft for instance. Several of them are described as being similar or identical to others in print. What murky waters. |
|||||||||
seadog93 Inner circle 3200 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-19 01:39, EscapeMaster wrote: I don't have Acidus novus either, although I have learned it from several sources (such as Osterlind, Switchcraft and a couple more). Have you done any readings on billets and where any of the peeks you say you know developed or inspired by anyone else's peek? If you truly and completely came up with your peeks on your own with no inspiration from Acidus Novus or any of it's derivatives then you have an argument for publishing it yourself (although I think most would still say you should at least credit the originator who found it first, if not get permission any ways.) But even if that is the case, you would absolutely be in the minority. Acidus Novus is very well known and most variations are, well, ...just variations.
"Love is the magician who pulls man out of his own hat" - Ben Hecht
"Love says 'I am everything.' Wisdom says 'I am nothing'. Between the two, my life flows." -Nisargadatta Maharaj Seadog=C-Dawg=C.ou.rtn.ey Kol.b |
|||||||||
EscapeMaster Loyal user 296 Posts |
I see your point and think it's very reasonable - perhaps the only decent thing to do. I pretty much agree with the always credit what you can/others think you should arguments. The bit I don't like here is the condition that you have bought a copy of the original first. The point of crediting is so people reading your manuscript can go to the original source (if they want to), and as a polite acknowledgement of your precursors. I don't think the point of crediting should be to make a few extra bucks for someone who may or may not have inspired you.
|
|||||||||
Lior Inner circle 1961 Posts |
What about some respect to a great creator like Milard that gave us such a great move that is used by so many mentalists?
I wonder about all this people here in the thread that want to "publish" "their" creations and they don't even have a real name? Lior
The Lior Touch
https://1amagic.com/ PEA Dave Lederman Award 2009 PEA Dunninger Award 2001 Life Time Achivmeant IUPA 2016 |
|||||||||
David Numen Inner circle 2070 Posts |
If you come up with ANYTHING you think is new and want to publsh it behooves you to check with several sources that what you've come up with hasn't been done before. If you disagree, try publishing an ebook about a wizard boy called Harry. You don't have to buy everything to check it out - you can contact the authors, find yourself a well-read mentor, find some people on here who you like and send them your writings. There are plenty of options to avoid plagiarism and the like. Granted, some still slip thru the crack - I had an idea published as part of my ebook "The Nud Deck" which I had sent to a few well-read bods and who encouraged me to publish but after I did word came back from others that the idea wasn't new although my applications were.
Another idea - The Sentir Tear - is a combination of a couple of published tears and a bit of tweaking from me. I didn't just publish without checking out it was OK with both Stuart Cumberland and Barrie Richardson that it was OK to use the elements from their tears. Both were gentlemen and the result is a book that Bob Cassidy praised so I am happy about that but I'd have been less happy had I not checked out everything was OK with the other authors. As to Millard, I know him to be a complete and utter gentleman and the notion that he's all about the money is ridiculous. I have a copy of the Acidus Novus CD. Do you know how I got it? Millard PM'd me to say he liked what I was saying about billets and wanted to send me a copy of the CD. That's all. I had never spoken directly with the man before and he made me an incredibly generous offer. Does that sound like someone all about the money as some have suggested here? I think given the appearance of AN is so many other publications over the years is enough generosity from Millard. If you want to discover the secret of AN you can find it in plenty of sources. If you want to PUBLISH AN in any way he has set a list of requirements which I think is totally fair. I have a routine in Sentir Tear which requires a peek and I recommend AN. I don't explain it and even though I count Millard as a friend in the art I decided to not to put a description in (and had I decided I was going to I would not have done so without asking his permission) - I refer to AN and recommend it and that should be enough for most would-be publisher. The even half-well-read mentalist should have a source for AN in their library and I didn't feel the need to explain it myself. If we ignore creators requests such as these we could end up with quite ridiculous tomes. Take my Sentir Tear - what if I had decided it would be prudent to include a history and description of instand read tears before I explained my own variation? Sure, it would be a useful encycopedic work for the mentalist but it would not have been my place to do so. Each variation I admire - Osterlind's. Jas Jakutsch (spelling?), Cumberland and Richardson - all belong to their creators and if you want to find out about them it's up to you to seek out their work, not up to me to republish it. David. |
|||||||||
EscapeMaster Loyal user 296 Posts |
I think I agree with everything you say, David. But why the explicit demand that you buy a copy of the original work?
|
|||||||||
psychicturtle Special user UK 821 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-19 01:39, EscapeMaster wrote: I know about 15, and I know there are many more in existence. Quote:
If I ever want to describe one of my methods do I have to buy Acidus Novus to check it's not the same? Personally I think it is wrong to publish, even if you did come up with it independently. I created a billet fold and Peek that allows a full card read with the card in plain view, then it is refolded as you hand it to them. But, I have not published it as according to someone who has had run-ins with Millard over similar issues, it is too similar to Obsidian oblique and close enough to Novus to annoy Millard, so I shouldn't publish. I think it is a great billet read, maybe Millard would want me to release it. But if it is the same as something already published then it should not be re-written and republished by someone else, no matter how independent the creation was. I have seen a bunch of Tommypad rip-offs and Tommy-boards even, with no credit to me at all. It sucks. |
|||||||||
Dr Spektor Eternal Order Carcanis 10781 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-19 01:39, EscapeMaster wrote: Here it is: So you figure out a billet reading method - cool! Go use it! It is great - your presentations SOAR! Then suddenly you decide to make a buck off a presentation... You write it up and mention "use reading billet method of choice!" cool! BUT then you write up a method that you claim you invented and describe the method in detail.... and DO NO RESEARCH and expect to be PAID..... or even just claim "I INVENTED IT FIRST!!!" THAT IS WHAT THE ISSUE IS ABOUT WHo cares if you use it or not - or in a routine which the billet reading method isn't what you are peddling... Its if you take a billet method and publish it and take credit and $ without doing do dillegence or even some form of dillegence... If anyone can argue this - you should reflect on your morals IMHO
"They are lean and athirst!!!!"
|
|||||||||
EscapeMaster Loyal user 296 Posts |
Quote:
BUT then you write up a method that you claim you invented and describe the method in detail.... and DO NO RESEARCH and expect to be PAID..... or even just claim "I INVENTED IT FIRST!!!" That's not what I'm suggesting and if it reads that way I apologize for lack of clarity. As per my shorter post above, I am intrigued by the explicit requirement that a copy of the original work be bought. |
|||||||||
ElliottB Inner circle 3250 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-01-19 01:39, EscapeMaster wrote: Your analogy is not accurate. Let us compare. You came up with a peek on your own. You are aware of Acidus Novus, which was published many years ago and is widely available. Yet you would rather not look at it to find out if it is the same as what you came up with. I came up with numerous billet techniques on my own. I spent thousands of dollars researching everything I could get my hands on concerning billet work. I vetted my work with well over 100 mentalists prior to publication. I posted my work on a private board, so top mentalists could provide feedback prior to publication. In all cases where I deemed it applicable, I asked others for permission to include techniques which were similar to their techniques. In several cases, I left out material which, after research, were deemed too similar to the works of others. The “Last Minute Note” on page 7 of Switchcraft refers to two techniques (one turned out to be the O’Brien move, so it is really just one technique) which I published and sent for free to numerous mentalist, and even posted on a board of 150 mentalists, long before the other work came out. While I had published and provided my work to well over a hundred people, I had not yet made it available for sale, so I included the last minute note to cover my bases. I also contacted the other fellow, who is now an internet friend of mine. He indicated that he was not aware of my work when he published his product, and I definitely believed him. Now, after spending thousands of dollars and countless hours researching and vetting my stuff with hundreds, did I still miss something? Yes. I missed a technique by the brilliant Mike O’Brien, which was buried in a non-billet related set of lecture notes published by another performer. Months after publication, I discovered the omission on my own. I immediately contacted Mike O’Brien, asking for permission to continue to include the technique in my manuscript and offered to remove it if desired. Mike gave me permission, and the updated credit is included on page 151 of Switchcraft. So, how is that the same as doing no research and ignoring a popular item that you know is probably the same as what you have? |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » How to publish your routine using Acidus Novus (1 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3 [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 < |