Two effects I'd die to know more about!

[praetoritevong]

and i think i said enough times that i wouldnt just copycat anyone and am only out for the trick, nothing more or less of the act, so in the end it would end the same as if i learnt it from a book.

But you didn't. You saw a magician who has more vision than you do perform it, and decided to take his creative vision.

You still haven't answered my earlier post. Have we heard of these magicians that supposedly condone stealing? Do they even exist or have names?

Ask someone noteworthy, like Jason England, about ethics, and let me know what he says.

It just occurred to me that these sorts of opinions more often than not come from people who have never worked on anything original of worth in their lives, and who don't take pride in their work.

 

[Aviva]

But you didn't. You saw a magician who has more vision than you do perform it, and decided to take his creative vision.

You still haven't answered my earlier post. Have we heard of these magicians that supposedly condone stealing? Do they even exist or have names?

Ask someone noteworthy, like Jason England, about ethics, and let me know what he says.

It just occurred to me that these sorts of opinions more often than not come from people who have never worked on anything original of worth in their lives, and who don't take pride in their work.

if you read a book and decide to use somethin from there you take that magicians creative vision as well but you throw in your own to have it suit you and what you do etcetera. that is what you want to see but it is what i do even since starting magic.

sorry for my english but i didnt really get the "magicians that supposedly condone stealing". ironicaly the quote about it not make sense was from the same magician those effects were from. unlike me he saw where you went with it but didnt agree.

 

[praetoritevong]

if you read a book and decide to use somethin from there you take that magicians creative vision as well but you throw in your own to have it suit you and what you do etcetera.

Yes, but there, you have done your own research to look into the book. You decided that that book would be right for you, you saw potential in it and its effects, and you decided to invest in it, and purchase the rights to it. You saw it, and decided to act on your ideas.

Contrast with you seeing a magician, who has done his research into the effects. He has decided that that material had potential, he decided that he could perform a great effect from it, he decided that it would suit him. THEN you came along, saw what he had created, and thought, what a good idea! I'm going to use it! You saw it, and decided to act on his ideas. Do you see the difference?


And you still haven't answered my question. When essentially every single magician who is considered the best in the industry endorses a particular point of view, it is not by accident that this happens. I am asking if the people who disagree with me have the authority or the experience to contradict this view, or whether they have had no experience with it whatsoever.

I am not suggesting that we take others' word for something as lore, but when it is an accepted principle by, as I said, the leading identities in the field, then there is obviously significant weight behind the argument. And it is no small matter that the masters of magic unanimously disagree with your opinion. This is not a matter of me and my opinion merely in a forum, but the generally accepted viewpoint. So since you contend that it is not a generally accepted viewpoint, I am asking whether the people who you use to defend your point of view have any weight or experience, or not.

 

[Aviva]

Yes, but there, you have done your own research to look into the book. You decided that that book would be right for you, you saw potential in it and its effects, and you decided to invest in it, and purchase the rights to it. You saw it, and decided to act on your ideas.

Contrast with you seeing a magician, who has done his research into the effects. He has decided that that material had potential, he decided that he could perform a great effect from it, he decided that it would suit him. THEN you came along, saw what he had created, and thought, what a good idea! I'm going to use it! You saw it, and decided to act on his ideas. Do you see the difference?

but thats where the whole circle you said starts over again. again i do not want to copy it. i started researching by asking if anyone knew anything similar on the market, any basics usable for it, i wouldve invested in it, i wouldve made it completely my own, and in the end it would look nowhere near the thing i saw that magician doing, and he gave me permission to do something exactly the same too but i wont do it exactly the same ever because yes, then its stealing. i use the magician as what you named the book, and what nowadays people do often with DVDs (not all do so but the ones getting big in the industry do, the others are copycats we both dont like).

And you still haven't answered my question. When essentially every single magician who is considered the best in the industry endorses a particular point of view, it is not by accident that this happens. I am asking if the people who disagree with me have the authority or the experience to contradict this view, or whether they have had no experience with it whatsoever.

I am not suggesting that we take others' word for something as lore, but when it is an accepted principle by, as I said, the leading identities in the field, then there is obviously significant weight behind the argument. And it is no small matter that the masters of magic unanimously disagree with your opinion. This is not a matter of me and my opinion merely in a forum, but the generally accepted viewpoint. So since you contend that it is not a generally accepted viewpoint, I am asking whether the people who you use to defend your point of view have any weight or experience, or not.

Again i am sorry for my english. its hard to answer something if i dont know what you meant but i think i may do now. yes, this guy has experience with anything you said. he had people pirating his releases, he had people putting crappy, and awesome covers of his routines over the web and youtube, he had people stealing his effects by naming it their own, people not giving credits, and soforth, he even wrote a whole book about how to survive in the world of magic nowadays included internet as both good and bad thing for us magicians. and still the guy disagreed with what you said. so did others.

obviously there is more than just your opinion and the principles you follow, same for me. i think we just have to deal with that if we like it or not.

 

[Brad Henderson]

Aviva,

While I am sure you can find many magicians who advocate theft (I can think of entire magic companies who have built their careers on it) that does not make it right. I am not interested in what a 15 year old with 1,000 downloaded DVDs and a poster of Kevin Parker on his wall thinks about magic. I am interested in what successful, creative, magicians who have developed a career in this field performing unique material which they have honed over years of work have to think.

When you read a book, you are reading material someone who has offered forth to the world of magic. When you see a piece in a book - it is your taste as a performer and your vision as an artist that imbues it with value. Then, when you perform that trick, it is your choices as a magician which bring it to life in a unique way.

When you take a trick from a performer, you are taking from someone who has NOT agreed to allow you to use his show as a starting point for your own wants. You are watching HIS choices, and HIS taste bring an idea to life. If you want to use that idea - the answer is simple: ASK HIM.

If he says ok, then get him to teach you. If he says no - then LEAVE IT ALONE. Someone else's act is not your inspiration. It is their art - their livelihood. It is not yours and you are owed nothing.

If you see something in another magicians act, and you want to do it - you need to ask them. ALWAYS.

If you don't - you are stealing from them.

Take a moment - if you actually care about this issue - and read Jason England's review of Michael Vincent's latest DVDs. He does an excellent job of describing why and how what you advocate is theft.

If you care, you will look it up and read it. If you don't, then you will come back and try to rationalize your ethically suspect position.

Any wagers?

 

[Aviva]

Aviva,

While I am sure you can find many magicians who advocate theft (I can think of entire magic companies who have built their careers on it) that does not make it right. I am not interested in what a 15 year old with 1,000 downloaded DVDs and a poster of Kevin Parker on his wall thinks about magic. I am interested in what successful, creative, magicians who have developed a career in this field performing unique material which they have honed over years of work have to think.

i and the magician i quoted arent like that. you (or actually praetoritevong) wanted to know what someone you described thought of it, i asked them and i gave you it. sorry but i cant help they reacted all like that.

When you read a book, you are reading material someone who has offered forth to the world of magic. When you see a piece in a book - it is your taste as a performer and your vision as an artist that imbues it with value. Then, when you perform that trick, it is your choices as a magician which bring it to life in a unique way.

When you take a trick from a performer, you are taking from someone who has NOT agreed to allow you to use his show as a starting point for your own wants. You are watching HIS choices, and HIS taste bring an idea to life. If you want to use that idea - the answer is simple: ASK HIM.

If he says ok, then get him to teach you. If he says no - then LEAVE IT ALONE. Someone else's act is not your inspiration. It is their art - their livelihood. It is not yours and you are owed nothing.

If you see something in another magicians act, and you want to do it - you need to ask them. ALWAYS.

If you don't - you are stealing from them.

thats why i asked if anyone knew anything about the described effects. if they werent original and released somehow, i would get the releases.

so ok they seemed original. and i was totally sure the guy agrees with it. i gave you his reaction which was what he said and made clear i was right about it.

Take a moment - if you actually care about this issue - and read Jason England's review of Michael Vincent's latest DVDs. He does an excellent job of describing why and how what you advocate is theft.

If you care, you will look it up and read it. If you don't, then you will come back and try to rationalize your ethically suspect position.

Any wagers?

even though again it doesnt have much to do with me, certainly not at this moment, i will look it up. thanks for referring it.

 

[praetoritevong]

but thats where the whole circle you said starts over again. again i do not want to copy it. i started researching by asking if anyone knew anything similar on the market, any basics usable for it, i wouldve invested in it, i wouldve made it completely my own, and in the end it would look nowhere near the thing i saw that magician doing, and he gave me permission to do something exactly the same too but i wont do it exactly the same ever because yes, then its stealing. i use the magician as what you named the book, and what nowadays people do often with DVDs (not all do so but the ones getting big in the industry do, the others are copycats we both dont like).



Again i am sorry for my english. its hard to answer something if i dont know what you meant but i think i may do now. yes, this guy has experience with anything you said. he had people pirating his releases, he had people putting crappy, and awesome covers of his routines over the web and youtube, he had people stealing his effects by naming it their own, people not giving credits, and soforth, he even wrote a whole book about how to survive in the world of magic nowadays included internet as both good and bad thing for us magicians. and still the guy disagreed with what you said. so did others.

obviously there is more than just your opinion and the principles you follow, same for me. i think we just have to deal with that if we like it or not.

It's very easy to say all that. All that you need to prove that is a name. I'm asking for the third time, and I won't bother again. This is getting tiresome, so I'll simply take any more posts without that name as conceding that argument.

The only other thing I'd add is this. Despite your proclamations to the contrary, the only thing you have told us about your magician friend here suggests that he didn't want you performing his routines. So simply ask him straight out if you can use his material or not. That should solve everything.

 

[the shelter]

Is it me or was Aviva more than clear about he already having permission before he even posted this thread? He even had it re-approved for you. Don't attack the innocent, man!

 

[praetoritevong]

he doesnt want to tell anything about these two things he does except for the names.

And the names were incorrect.

 

[the shelter]

Why are you prejudging?

If he gave you the names of the two tricks, but nobody's heard of them and you still can't find any information on them, then either they are not for sale, or he gave you false names because he didn't want you to find them.

 

[Bijlogg]

Why are you prejudging?

I don't really understand that question in the context of what you quoted from me just there. I think I drew a perfectly reasonable conclusion based on the situation.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Tom

 

[the shelter]

I don't really understand that question in the context of what you quoted from me just there. I think I drew a perfectly reasonable conclusion based on the situation.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Tom

I think you totally did, that's why I quoted you.

And the names were incorrect.

I called that prejudging because he doesn't know if the names were incorrect or if the effects just aren't on the market, does he?

 

[praetoritevong]

I think that was directed at me - that is to say that there is the possibility that the two effects are simply not for sale.

All I'm going to say to that is, if you can find effects by that name, then by all means, prove me wrong. Even if you take an effect, say, Dianoetic Rage by Tom Baxter, which is not for sale - the magic community still knows about the effect.

Either way, the point still stands - which is, simply, ask. Your argument seems to be saying that there is ambiguity in the magician friend's answer, to which I would simply add that ambiguity is not good enough to constitute an affirmative response.

Besides which, let's take another section of Aviva's earlier posts:

he doesnt want to say anything about them

Which again suggests the opposite to your suggestion.

In any case, what is more concerning to me is the prevailing attitude which has taken place here.

If the magician did not want him to use his effects and deliberately gave him a misleading answer, then he is stealing. If the magician did not give him his express permission to use his effects, unless there is reasonable evidence to point to the contrary, (e.g. directions as to exactly where the effect can be found) it is still stealing.

 

[Bijlogg]

I didn't base my conclusion on what praetoritevong alone said. Nobody in this thread has heard of those names, nobody was able to offer any leads, and if none of the magicians have even heard of it, nor does anything turn up when searching the internet or major magic retailers, I don't think it's unreasonable AT ALL to assume either the effects aren't being sold, or that false names were given.

In fact, if you go search "wowmg magic trick" on google right now as I did, you will get 6 results. 6! From the whole of the internet. 3 of which are from aviva posting this very thread here and on learnmagictricks.org. (I won't even bother telling you what I think about that site in this thread). I don't know about you, but that does not sound like a marketed effect to me.

Tom

 

[praetoritevong]

I didn't base my conclusion on what praetoritevong alone said. Nobody in this thread has heard of those names, nobody was able to offer any leads, and if none of the magicians have even heard of it, nor does anything turn up when searching the internet or major magic retailers, I don't think it's unreasonable AT ALL to assume either the effects aren't being sold, or that false names were given.

In fact, if you go search "wowmg magic trick" on google right now as I did, you will get 6 results. 6! From the whole of the internet. 3 of which are from aviva posting this very thread here and on learnmagictricks.org. (I won't even bother telling you what I think about that site in this thread). I don't know about you, but that does not sound like a marketed effect to me.

Tom

Tom, you misunderstand - the shelter was suggesting that *I* was prejudging, not you. In essence, he is raising the possibility that the magician friend in question did not give him misleading information, but rather simply that the effects he mentioned are, as you suggested, not marketed.

 

[Bijlogg]

Tom, you misunderstand - the shelter was suggesting that *I* was prejudging, not you. In essence, he is raising the possibility that the magician friend in question did not give him misleading information, but rather simply that the effects he mentioned are, as you suggested, not marketed.

Well in which case perhaps shelter can enlighten us all...

Shelter, what exactly is the point you are trying to make.

Tom

 

[the shelter]

I found this thread via-via when I was looking for those effects because some friends told me about the colour change which they had seen on BlogTV.

But yes, when I looked through this thread I uncomfortably was tired of praetoritevong demaning answers while Aviva was obviously having language problems (I would like to bet with you that English isn't his first language). Also Aviva told several times that he already had permission from the magician, which praetoritevong apparently missed so I just wanted to clear that up.

Obviously, the magician doesn't want to teach Aviva the effects, but he gave him permission to perform them if Aviva would know how they work. Aviva therefore asked for some help which he didn't get. I think he just asks around to get to know the basics which would make him being able to make similar effects.

 

[praetoritevong]

I found this thread via-via when I was looking for those effects because some friends told me about the colour change which they had seen on BlogTV.

But yes, when I looked through this thread I uncomfortably was tired of praetoritevong demaning answers while Aviva was obviously having language problems (I would like to bet with you that English isn't his first language). Also Aviva told several times that he already had permission from the magician, which praetoritevong apparently missed so I just wanted to clear that up.

Obviously, the magician doesn't want to teach Aviva the effects, but he gave him permission to perform them if Aviva would know how they work. Aviva therefore asked for some help which he didn't get. I think he just asks around to get to know the basics which would make him being able to make similar effects.

Firstly - I do not feel that my posts have been demeaning. I give people ample opportunity to provide evidence, and I do not feel that this has been satisfactorily done in this circumstance. I sympathise with English issues (technically, it's not my first language either), but ethics have nothing to do with language, and I think that my requests for proof have been suitably comprehensible.

And secondly - I disagree that he gave him permission to perform the effects if he could find them. It is duly noted that on page 3, Aviva claims to have permission - but given about half a dozen other posts to the contrary, of which I have given two, and given that he has claimed other things without being able to back them up, I do not think it unreasonable that I treat such statements skeptically.

In any case, I and others still feel that his arguments for his ethical judgments are incorrect - and as I stated above, he has made claims, regarding industry known creators of magic, but has been unable to back them up - and has been unable to address other issues presented to him as well. Therefore he has not gotten any help, because he's asking, in our opinion, for something unethical.

So on the whole, again, I do not see my admitted skepticism as unwarranted.

 

[the shelter]

That's where I think you are wrong. Look at what he posted:

he didnt tell me to leave them alone but he just didnt want to tell me how they were done.

nono he would love it. he is always interested in how solid his stuff is. its more that he challenged me.

i do have permission but its not that he will teach me himself.

but you guys were the ones saying that he didnt exactly give me permission. i just had him approve it. he even said like: of course you can, you know the deal dont you".

Almost every single time you replied saying he didn't have permission. Even the magician's reaction Aviva quoted made clear that he already was having permission. Read:

but you guys were the ones saying that he didnt exactly give me permission. i just had him approve it. he even said like: of course you can, you know the deal dont you".

Also this thread wasn't originally created to talk about ethics, was it? If I would be honest I think I'm far more on Aviva's side than on yours. If you look at the replies, it's clear that you and Brad didn't get it. Pj however, saw what the person Aviva quoted meant, still disagreed, but his reply was worth way more than all of your and Brad's posts together. You didn't help, I bet Pj did. Sorry but that's what it looks like from my point of view, the point of view of an outsider.

I understand you threw in ethical stuff to tell him it's wrong what he does (although I don't agree with the way you did do that) but I don't see much wrong with Aviva's way of handling. He explained himself very well telling you why he sees no difference in live magic and books. As long as he does what he said he does there really is no problem at all.

I'd rather be catching magicians who are forwarding second-handed DVDs, books, tricks, props, etcetera, so that more people get to know the secrets and the author gets less money for his work (sorry Jason), than that I would say that Aviva is wrong.

 

[praetoritevong]

Your post seems to be a bit confused. You start off by defending Aviva, then question the discussion on ethics in this topic, then criticised my posts, then went back to supporting Aviva. And then had a brief paragraph on time better spent? I'm not sure that there's a central point. And it's interesting that you attacked me for being demeaning, and then dropped it as soon as I answered back. Feels very much a drop and run argument - drop anything that gets sufficiently contradicted and run with anything else you can think of. Nonetheless I will attempt to address the individual parts as best as possible.

That's where I think you are wrong. Look at what he posted:

Almost every single time you replied saying he didn't have permission. Even the magician's reaction Aviva quoted made clear that he already was having permission. Read:

As I explained above, I believe that I have ample reason to be skeptical - namely because, when asked for details, he has conveniently disappeared/ignored posts. Saying that Jonathan Bayme gave me permission to burn all T11 DVDs doesn't make it so. If I came onto the forums, and posted a series of posts essentially saying "hey guys jb said of course i could take his effect. but he doesn't want to tell me what effect it is." - objectively speaking, how convincing is that? The first quote you gave does not even give assent. Not to mention that the posts where the magician supposedly gave assent only came after he was called out on it several times. I hope you can see that it's not particularly convincing, his "proof". Again: "of course lee asher said i could burn witness anytime. where can i buy it?" is not good enough for me. If that's good enough for you, then we obviously have different standards of evidence.

If I am indeed wrong, then, as per all my other points, it would be very easy to correct. *hint*

Also this thread wasn't originally created to talk about ethics, was it? If I would be honest I think I'm far more on Aviva's side than on yours. If you look at the replies, it's clear that you and Brad didn't get it. Pj however, saw what the person Aviva quoted meant, still disagreed, but his reply was worth way more than all of your and Brad's posts together. You didn't help, I bet Pj did. Sorry but that's what it looks like from my point of view, the point of view of an outsider.

I got it very well, thank you for your concern. I have stated, quite clearly, what constitutes ethical actions, and my reasons for it. If that isn't helpful, it is only because one is not willing to agree or consider that argument. I can only suggest that your opinion is perhaps creating a personal bias between "agreement" and "helpfulness".

I understand what Aviva is saying; I just think he's wrong, and so does, as far as I know, every single master of the art of magic. As I said before to Aviva: If you would like evidence of this, please email Jason England, or Alain Nu, or John Carney, etc. They can probably express better than I could anyway. In any case, that point has been made before. From my point of view, it's pretty clear that Aviva doesn't understand our argument except to answer with stubborn denial and questionable "evidence".

I understand you threw in ethical stuff to tell him it's wrong what he does (although I don't agree with the way you did do that) but I don't see much wrong with Aviva's way of handling. He explained himself very well telling you why he sees no difference in live magic and books. As long as he does what he said he does there really is no problem at all.

I'd rather be catching magicians who are forwarding second-handed DVDs, books, tricks, props, etcetera, so that more people get to know the secrets and the author gets less money for his work (sorry Jason), than that I would say that Aviva is wrong.

I'm not really sure what you want me to say with that. You've essentially said, "I disagree with A, therefore I'd rather be arguing B."

So I will simply conclude by saying that you are mistaken if you think that my life somehow revolves around this thread, or that I devote hours in search of a perfect reply. In fact, I'm going out to perform in about an hour. But if someone posted here asking for downloaded material, I would spend as much time as I have here arguing that point, if I believe that I am right.