A Rose by Any Other Name? Not if you're Teller

[Scotto]

It's the greatest crime in the magic community -- revealing the secret behind another magician's illusion -- and now, Teller (from Penn & Teller) is suing ... claiming he's a victim of the malfeasance.

Teller -- who legally changed his name to just "Teller" -- filed the lawsuit in Nevada federal court, claiming a foreign magician by the name of Gerard Bakardy posted a YouTube video, in which he performs a trick called "The Rose & Her Shadow."

In the trick, Bakardy uses a spotlight to cast a shadow of a rose onto a screen -- and then proceeds to "cut" the shadow's petals ... causing the real flower's petals to fall to the ground. Ta-da!

But Teller insists -- "The Rose & Her Shadow" is a blatant rip-off of his most famous illusion called "Shadows" ... which he copyrighted all the way back in 1983. Teller says he's been performing the trick with his partner Penn Jillette since 1976.

But even worse than displaying the copyrighted trick on the Internet, Teller claims Bakardy is also trying to peddle the secret behind the illusion ... for $3,050 a pop.

Now, Teller's suing for copyright infringement ... demanding a court order to block Bakardy from selling the trick, and ever performing it again.

Teller is also suing for unspecified damages.

[Scotto]

Here is a link to the "Courthouse News" about the story

http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/04/13/45593.htm

[Doug Thornton]

For anyone who has never seen it (and please catch it live when you can), a clip of Teller posted on Youtube...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=un1pNtmYguA

[Dustin Stinett]

My favorite effect since the first time I saw him do it at the Phoenix Theater in San Francisco in 1978.

[Jonathan Townsend]

There are other ways to approach the plot of sympathetic magic between substance and shadow. Among them the bit in the play Peter Pan, Karl Germain's lock trick and Mad Magazine's item with shadows doing what the characters were thinking.

What's the appeal of copying?

[Steve Bryant]

In the Martin Lewis issue of Genii (Sept 2002), there is a great head shot of Martin, but the shadow, eerily, does not quite match the head that is casting it. A gorgeous issue, by the way, thanks to Liz.

[erdnasephile]

In an non-magic vein, there is a rather famous issue of The Uncanny X-Men where this concept is used to foreshadow a seminal event in the Marvel comics Silver Age mythology.

[M.Lee]

Here we go again ! appears the only one who had the resources to do somthing about the masked Idiot was Copperfield- in a nut shell he didn't !
and i really dont understand exactly why , as it very well could have been a precedent for Events of this nature as were now seeing again.

So everyone doing a split fan could have been sued by Cardini or (as there is evideced that someone prior to Cardini inventing the split fan.

OR Everyone who does a subtrunk based on speed should be sued by either S&Roy the Pendragons based on the Cloth work ?

What if this fellow Bakerdy decided to do the rose effect but gives p&T credit for refining the effect, as J.Sheridan believes its methology's been around and was documented in print .

Did PT Selbit ever win his court cases ? re. protecting the sawing.. ..Im not sure but do knowe that it "tapped ' him out inancially ! This could be a rough and long haul.

ML

[Oddly Bent]

Secrets Revealed: How Magicians Protect Intellectual Property Without Law

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1005564

[mrgoat]

Here we go again ! appears the only one who had the resources to do somthing about the masked Idiot was Copperfield- in a nut shell he didn't !
and i really dont understand exactly why , as it very well could have been a precedent for Events of this nature as were now seeing again.

So everyone doing a split fan could have been sued by Cardini or (as there is evideced that someone prior to Cardini inventing the split fan.

OR Everyone who does a subtrunk based on speed should be sued by either S&Roy the Pendragons based on the Cloth work ?

What if this fellow Bakerdy decided to do the rose effect but gives p&T credit for refining the effect, as J.Sheridan believes its methology's been around and was documented in print .

Did PT Selbit ever win his court cases ? re. protecting the sawing.. ..Im not sure but do knowe that it "tapped ' him out inancially ! This could be a rough and long haul.

ML

Teller has copyrighted this effect.

Legally, as I understand it, in the US you HAVE to persue all cases of copyright infringement or you lose that copyright.

Have you ever created anything worth protecting or are you just bitching like a girl for fun?

[Tom Stone]

Legally, as I understand it, in the US you HAVE to persue all cases of copyright infringement or you lose that copyright.

I think that goes for Trademarks (Coca Cola, Plastic Padding etc.), not copyright.

[M.Lee]

Thank you Mr. Stone.

Sadly the trick is still up on some European sites and still for sale , so i believe until the courts make a ruling Bakardy is still able to sell the illusion for only $3,050 SAD !

so yes ! ..Here we go again ! appears the only one who had the resources to do somthing about the masked Idiot way back when -was Copperfield- in a nut shell he didn't !
and I really dont understand exactly why , as it very well could have been a precedent for Events of this nature as were now seeing again.

Was the Blaney Ladder suspension ever able to not be knocked off ? im not sure if the WMDA (world magic dealers Assn.) were able to do anything about this ..Can some one shed light on what if anything was ever done to protect Walters lovely creation ?

Did PT Selbit ever win his court cases ? re. protecting the sawing.. ..Im not sure but do know that it "tapped ' him out financially as has been documented.. This could be a rough/ long haul for both parties.

ML

[Tom Stone]

...as it very well could have been a precedent for Events of this nature as were now seeing again.

Fortunately, there are precedents. Since the transgression was made in Europe, it will be tried under European copyright law, where creators have a stronger position.

[Dick Koornwinder]

Just for the record Mr. Bakardy is from Belgium and not from the Netherlands!

Kind regards,

Dick Koornwinder
Amsterdam, The Netherlands

[Richard Hatch]

This story got 27 seconds this morning on NPR's Morning Edition:
http://www.npr.org/2012/04/19/150941387 ... agic-trick

[IrishMagicNews]

It was also picked up by Irish mainstream media. I was on national radio here earlier this morning discussing the story and hopefully doing it justice.

You can listen here.

I don't wanna clutter up this thread but i would love some constructive feedback on the interview. If you have some please PM me here.

[IrishMagicNews]

Via Alan Watsons eZine

"Message by Teller (US)

By now you may have heard this over the grapevine, as it were,
but I felt it important for you to have news directly from me as
quickly as possible.

You may be acquainted with my signature piece, "Shadows," in
which I slash the shadow of a rose, and the actual leaves and
petals fall where the shadow has been cut. It is the oldest piece
in the active Penn & Teller repertoire, in continuous use in all
our major runs from Broadway to international touring, to Las
Vegas. It is an icon for our show and the piece I hope to be
remembered by in magic history.

I created "Shadows" in the mid-1970s, copyrighted it in 1983, and
since then the magic community has shown me wonderful ethical
support in allowing it to remain virtually untouched by copyists.

Unfortunately, a few weeks ago, I was alerted to a YouTube video
of a man (his name is Gerard Dogge, stage name Gerard Bakardy)
selling equipment for emulating my piece. This was done without a
single attempt to contact me, seek permission, or arrange a
license agreement.

I had my attorneys contact YouTube, and the videos were promptly
taken down for copyright dispute. I contacted Gerard
Bakardy/Dogge and let him know that my U.S. Copyright and E.U.
Droit Moral entitled me to take legal action for what he had
posted. I attempted to resolve the problem by discussion and
negotiation, but he did not respond satisfactorily to that
approach.

This forced me to exercise my rights as copyright holder, and
file for copyright infringement on April 11, 2012 in U.S. Federal
Court. For your information, I include a copy of the legal
documents below. I hope we will not have to add contributory and
vicarious infringers in the action should third parties attempt
to aid the infringer in selling his infringing product.

If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to me. I
want to assure my friends and fans that we intend to enforce our
rights vigorously. And if you become aware of any further
infringement of my copyrighted work, I'd be very, very grateful
if you let me know at your earliest convenience.

If you should have anything to communicate pertaining to my suit,
please use: shadow@penn-teller.com

To view legal documents:
http://www.magicnewzealand.com/email/teller.pdf "

[Dustin Stinett]

An update on this story on The Hollywood Reporter site:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-es ... asy-424577

(Thanks to Mel Kientz for the source.)

[erdnasephile]

Wow, that sounds extremely frustrating!

[Tom Stone]

Those who keep track of these things might remember that Gerard Bakardy responded with a counter suit, suing Teller for a silly amount of money for libel and defamation - based on reasoning one would usually only find within the less coherent conspiracy theories.

Anyhow - that trial is now over. As expected, Bakardy gets nothing.
http://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20140117_00933432

[magicam]

Teller has copyrighted this effect. ...

Not sure what you mean by that, but if you're suggesting that Teller has copyrighted (that is, has an enforceable copyright to) the entirety of "Shadows" -- from every little detail of the performance to its workings (secrets) and overall concept -- then assuming we're talking about U.S. laws, that's now how this country's copyright law works. For better or worse, its protections are far narrower.

That's not to say that Teller couldn't copyright any of the elements of "Shadows." For example, he could certainly copyright his patter.

[CraigMitchell]

Google's translation:

"The Civil Court of Antwerp , the requirement of magician Gerard Dogge ( 56 ) , aka Gerard Bakardy rejected . He had 8 million claimed damages from the American magician Raymond Teller ( 65) for slander and libel . The court found that no evidence and sentenced to pay court fees Dogge counters, which were budgeted . At 16,500 euros

A juggling act is the basis of the dispute . Dogge managed to improve the world famous trick 'Shadows ' of counter and put it in March 2012 on You Tube . Teller wanted to buy his act , but when Dogge refused , he dragged him before the civil court in Las Vegas for infringement of its copyright . He claims 300,000 euros from the Belgian.

The American substantiated his claim with some screenshots of the act with overhead Dogge a toolbar with links to porn sites with young men . Given the progress in America are public documents that anyone can find on the Internet.

Dogge thought that Teller had done so his name would be the pornographic material and Teller wanted to ruin him. Associated as deliberately The court found that no evidence and did not see how the entries on the toolbar Dogge could harm because they could not be with him. Personally related

Who the websites via the screenshots may look , is sufficiently familiar with the internet to know that they have nothing to do with the video below , but it is the favorite websites of the computer user who made the screenshots . His claim was rejected. In the case of Las Vegas is still pending cases ."


Somehow the case now involved porn ...

[El Mystico]

Porn involved?
Did one side involve mrgoat in their legal team?

[Richard Kaufman]

It's a Google translation, which means it's pretty much worthless.

[mrgoat]

Porn involved?
Did one side involve mrgoat in their legal team?

I can't talk about that.

[Jonathan Pendragon]

It sounds something like the neologism technique used against former Congressman Santorum.

[Jonathan Townsend]

Sounds like it's gonna be fashionable to solicit for adult entertainment and youngsters and amusing distractions all on the same page.

The thorns on that flower called by names including rose cut just as deep.

As if on cue- a study about where people look:
http://www.fastcodesign.com/3025318/asi ... ing-online

enjoy

[Bill Mullins]

Here is a law review article about the case.

[Jonathan Pendragon]

I think your mis-spelling the name of the guy who stole the effect. I am sure there is an S and T in there somewhere.

[Bob Farmer]

Bill: thank you for that excellent reference.

[Jack Shalom]

I think your mis-spelling the name of the guy who stoled the effect. I am sure there is an S and T in there somewhere.

An H and an I too?

[Jack Shalom]

An interview I did with the brilliant talented film animator Nina Paley was broadcast yesterday on WBAI radio. You may enjoy listening to it, here:

http://jackshalom.net/2015/11/27/seder-masochism/

In the second half of the interview she talks about her unorthodox ideas about copyright--and how by refusing to copyright her work she made over $100,000 on her animated film Sita Sings the Blues. Is there a path for magicians here? I don't know. Magic is obviously a special case. But her counter-intuitive ideas about copyright are definitely something to think about.

[Brad Jeffers]

--and how by refusing to copyright her work she made over $100,000 on her animated film Sita Sings the Blues

This statement is a bit misleading.

She made over $100,000 on her animated film Sita Sings the Blues, despite refusing to copyright her work; not by refusing to copyright her work.

She would have made the same amount, regardless of whether she had copyrighted her work or not.

Which is her point; with which I agree.

[Bill Marquardt]

I produced a music CD for a country artist friend of mine. This is not my normal line of work, but I had the equipment to do the job and used professional services to duplicate the discs. When I let people know that I had recorded several tracks for an album they would ask me for copies. I said, "Sure, send me $12.95 and receive a CD post paid." I never heard back from any of them. For some reason they believed I would send them MP3s for free.

My example may not represent the majority of cases, but that's what happened. I paid the artist and never recovered my modest investment. If people can get something for free, they will go that way. Not everyone, but enough to cause a loss of income. Copyright might not prevent thievery, but I do not see it as a bad thing.

[Jack Shalom]

I think you all make good points, but I think there is another side to it.

I suspect Paley would argue that it was the lack of copyright that allowed Sita to become seen so widely and gain attention. It spread like wildfire over the Internet. Had she interfered with that process, flexing her copyright muscle, she would not have gotten the exposure she did. That exposure, in turn led her to being able to capitalize (literally) on her work through other means (donations, t-shirts, festival awards, etc.)

This is somewhat analogous to what happened with illegal downloading of music; at a certain point some (but admittedly not all) musicians were begging for their stuff to be illegally downloaded. Because in a very competitive market, the first thing is to be recognized with the monetization happening afterwards (via, say, concerts, merchandise, tv appearances, etc.)

As to Bill M's comment, no one says that by giving up copyright you're automatically on the gravy train. You still have to go out and hustle hustle hustle and figure out how to monetize the thing. But getting the recognition first is often a good way to begin.

Whether that model can work for magic is interesting. I see some movement in that direction. For example, Aaron Fisher gives away some pretty technical work for free, with the expectation that he gets his name out there as an expert, and with the future promise of people signing up for his more advanced courses.

I think that in age where distribution costs are no longer an issue, we have to start thinking differently about how to monetize this stuff, if that's the aim. I don't think Nina has the whole answer, but I think these are some very interesting experiments that magicians may be able to learn from.