Ethical question

[Brad Henderson]

But who decided that it was part of our lexicon? Wouldn't it be unethical to not track down the original book it was published in? You dismiss this on the grounds of a theoretical lexicon which we all claim as ours?

That is an EXCELLENT question. And one that has an answer in practice, but not in rule. In fact, this has been the cause of most of the heated controversy's when it comes to "stolen" material released by others.

Here is the simple answer as it applies to re-publishing. If you created it, then it's yours to do with as you like. Now, if you publish in a "free source," such as a magazine, then others may use it with credit. If you publish it in a commercial source, such as a book or DVD you sell, then others may use it with credit AND permission.

Unfortunately, we do not have a stated "public domain" period for magic ideas. But, as a rule, if someone is no longer alive, and that idea is no longer being published by someone who owns the rights, then that idea would have entered the lexicon.

Now, when it comes to use in performance: If you want to use an idea in performance, and that idea is a commercially sold idea - you need to pay for it. Period.

Personally, I believe that if I want to use an idea - I should have tracked down the book it is in. And I think I have managed to stay true to that.

So, what about tracking someone down who has the same passion about magic as you do, who happens to know the trick. You still had to put time and energy in finding the person who knows it. Is this wrong?

And that person you tracked down is free to share all of the original ideas he or she may have. But is it right to share something that is not theirs?

A well known magician is lecturing to several very serious students who have spent a lot of money to attend a seminar. He is very giving and is sharing details of his own act that he has never tipped before. One of these serious students asks him a question about one moment in the show. He replies, "I don't feel comfortable talking about that. It's not my idea, it's XXXXs and he has released it on his own."

Now, this man is lecturing to a group of very serious magicians. Did he do the right thing? I think so. He paid for the rights to use that material, they did not. These people spent a lot of money and traveled great distances to learn from him. But even then, he respected another creator's work. In the long run, that is the right thing to do.

I realize this, and I believe you misread the intention of my original post here, and therefore I responded as I did.

Take this, for example:

He isn't asking about a whole community. He is asking about a single person. A friend of his. You're telling me there is no one you know who you practice for who helps you with any problems you may have? Or, why not get on the case of people who have magic jam sessions.

Like I said, there is no problem in sharing and brainstorming with a friend. But there is a line that DOES get crossed. I think we need to be aware of that line, and how individual actions, when combined, impact our community.

Basically, this question is one we cannot answer for him. He said it in the posts title. "Ethical Question." Everyone has their own beliefs and set of ethics. In the end, we are trying to debate about beliefs, and not facts. In computers, Psychology, and others, there is a written ethical guideline format to be followed. We, as magicians, do not have something like this other than the magicians code, and debating that would only open a can of worms.

Jussayin'

-ThrallMind

And because we do not have guidelines, we NEED to discuss these ideas. Many people do not realize how theft and plagiarism have affected those they admire. Unless they learn, they may never choose to consider the effects of their actions.

The internet has revealed a world of ignorance. (I do not mean stupidity, I mean ignorance.) Only by being exposed to new ideas and concepts can people's knowledge base expand, and only then can they have better tools with which to make better decisions. No one can decide what the poster feels is right or wrong. But we all SHOULD share as much information as we can, so they can better decide what they think is right or wrong.

Brad Henderson

 

[ThrallMind]

And because we do not have guidelines, we NEED to discuss these ideas. Many people do not realize how theft and plagiarism have affected those they admire. Unless they learn, they may never choose to consider the effects of their actions.

Then why not take it upon ourselves to make a post, of what ethical guidelines should be followed? I'm not trying to be condescending, I'm being sincere.

No one can decide what the poster feels is right or wrong. But we all SHOULD share as much information as we can, so they can better decide what they think is right or wrong.

That's exactly my point. Which is why I don't understand the post you made in relation to my first post, questioning my beliefs, instead of just sharing yours. The magic castle has a huge library. Anyone willing to be a member has access to it. For free. They do not have to pay the creators for the work. The original intent of my post was to give my opinion. Not start this long debate about whose beliefs are right or wrong.

Arguing that this topic is about ethics and not exposure is just semantics. They go hand in hand, at least in my eyes.

Which brings me to the point of all this. Debating ethics is like debating favorite colors. Everyone has their own opinion. We should be able to say what we feel without having it questioned. It takes it from sharing knowledge to trying to prove who is right.

-ThrallMind

 

[Brad Henderson]

The very point of debating is questioning.

The reason we have discussions of ethics is because there are issues that fall not in the black and not in the white. There are even people who see white as black.

For example, one notorious magic manufacturer believes that he has the right to copy anything he desires as long as there is enough difference to keep the copyright laws from affecting him. So, he will take a trick by someone you admire, and merely rewrite it and sell it.

He sees nothing wrong with this. Do you?

That is worthy of debate and questioning. Because there ARE people out there who see nothing wrong with this. And if we merely let them say "Hey, I didn't break the copyright, so I can do what I want" then other people may come to see no harm in it. There are people whose "ethical opinions" justified genocide. Should we allow them these opinions because they are no difference from their favorite colors?

If we do not question, if we do not debate, then people will keep doing things which hurt our art. Ethics will ALWAYS be the subject of debate. It is the nature of the beast.

The reason I questioned your beliefs is because they left loopholes. At what point is someone a magician worthy of sharing? At what point does "sharing" cease to be "helping" and starts to harm? You post did not address these issues and I wanted to know how you reconciled them.

As to the Castle library, I would hope that if anyone found a trick they wanted to use in a commercially available book on the shelves there, that they would do the right thing and buy the book on their own.

I also know that most of the currently available books were donated to the Castle by the people who wrote them. I have given permission for Castle members to use my material, because I donated a copy of my books to them.

However, there is a difference between accessing a library and going in with a buddy to buy books and make copies for each other, no?

Where does the line between sharing and theft exist? Does it?

It's a good question and an important one.

Is there a difference?

What do you think?

Brad Henderson

 

[ThrallMind]

However, there is a difference between accessing a library and going in with a buddy to buy books and make copies for each other, no?

I'm confused by what you are saying here.

Where does the line between sharing and theft exist? Does it?

Let's try this. If you own a DVD player, I'm sure you and friends watch movies on them (I am not speaking about magic DVDs). However, they did not pay for the movie, but you are allowing them to watch it. Is this theft?

-ThrallMind

 

[Brad Henderson]

It's a different type of content.

Magic is about information. Specifically it is about secret information.

That information has value - as evidenced by the fact people sell it.

When you give that information away, are you not diluting the value? If you use that information without paying for it, is there not an imbalance?

You are trying to compare apples and oranges. Which is why the first example is confusing you as well.

Here's a fun thought. You borrowed a buddies DVD and perform one of the tricks from it regularly. You actually have booked shows using it. You finally get a chance to meet the creator. You tell him how much you love the trick. You tell him how much work it has gotten you. Do you tell him you didn't think it was worth paying for and your got it from the DVD your buddy loaned you?

Brad

 

[Kadin]

Wow... I seem to have sparked an interest or two on this subject. I'm so glad so many of you have chimed in with your opinions.

I just want to clarify, as some have already been able to decipher, this friend I'm talking about is someone who, like me, also has done magic in the past. We both did it together but it was at a very, VERY basic level with very basic tricks. We had a magic shop by us and we'd buy them and try to impress each other. Sometimes we'd reveal the trick to each other, sometimes we wouldn't.

I guess the reason I'm asking this now is because there's someone else involved here that's, in my opinion, a little more 'real' than a book of tricks or a quick $2 gag. Don't get me wrong, people spent time and money on those obviously, but that's the only way I can express it.

I've always tried to have the integrity that I feel is proper and I'd never want to feel that I'm short-changing anyone. I started to think this when I approached the idea of him coming here to Theory11, buying a trick, showing me, and then each of us revealing the method and then showing our friends - BUT keeping it secret from everyone else (friends, family, etc.)

We'd be the only two knowing them. It's sharing of course and allowing us to essentially learn more for a reduced price, but I think the theory behind it is not of an 'underhanded' purpose...

Hope that makes a bit more sense.

Kadin

PS. Great community here, very impressed with the topics I've seen on this forum. I was a bit apprehensive at first with spending some money here but it looks like this might be a place for me for the a good while...

 

[Brad Henderson]

If you were the creator of an effect, and your livelihood depended in part on the sales of that effect, how would you feel if people did what you suggest?

My goal in adding to this discussion was to make people aware that there are issues bigger than exposure - namely how our choices affect the creators (and how those choices will determine how creators choose to share - or not share -in the future.)

Only you can decide what you are going to do. All I ask is that you consider the question from as many different sides as possible.

Good luck,

Brad Henderson

 

[Kadin]

If you were the creator of an effect, and your livelihood depended in part on the sales of that effect, how would you feel if people did what you suggest?

My goal in adding to this discussion was to make people aware that there are issues bigger than exposure - namely how our choices affect the creators (and how those choices will determine how creators choose to share - or not share -in the future.)

Only you can decide what you are going to do. All I ask is that you consider the question from as many different sides as possible.

Good luck,

Brad Henderson

This is where I get a little bit confused. Just so you all know, I purchased the Prophet trick on here. Some might know it in detail, some might not. I'm obviously not going to talk directly about it as that's a bit out of the scope of this topic.

But I will say that this particular trick is not 100% genuine; meaning it was not created completely on its own. This trick was formed based off of at least 3 other tricks very similar to this one. Are there some differences? Sure. But I believe the basic fundamental core of the trick is the same.

So the question I ask now is this: If I shared this trick with a friend, in confidence, who exactly is getting cheated here? The original creator of the trick or Theory11 and Tom Isaacson? I bought it from here, but the work is based off someone else's... in some part.

 

[Brad Henderson]

So the question I ask now is this: If I shared this trick with a friend, in confidence, who exactly is getting cheated here? The original creator of the trick or Theory11 and Tom Isaacson? I bought it from here, but the work is based off someone else's... in some part.

Great question.

I cannot speak to this trick per se, but I can give you some suggestions.

If the trick were not Tom's to teach, then to buy it is to cheat the true creator. A couple of years ago a "mentalist" put out a book filled with ideas that belonged to other people. Sometimes he credited them, but he never asked any of these people if he could explain their work and sell it.

To have bought that book is to cheat the people who were stolen from.

Now, let's say Tom took a bunch of old ideas, but them together in a new way. Or took some new ideas, got the original creator's blessing, and put them together in a new way.

If you want to do that trick that way (a way, admittedly, YOU had never thought of before) then you need to pay the guy who put 2 and 2 together.

A young man from LA put together a very clever mind reading routine that was based on an old old idea. The presentation was new, the script was great, and there were several new touches to this old idea.

He sold it for about $100 I think.

A lot of magicians complained: I know that trick. Why should I pay to do the trick his way when I already know how it works.

Well, because it's HIS way.

A professional knows that sometimes the difference between a good trick and a show stopper is a single line. Geoffrey Durham wrote about how changing just one "beat" in a routine could be the difference between polite applause and regular standing ovations.

Here's it rule of thumb.

If you see an idea that you did not think of yourself and you want to use it, it must be used ethically. If it is a trick or idea for sale, then if you want to use it, you need to buy it from the people who created it.

If it is not for sale, then you should at least ASK before you use it.

Make more sense?

Brad