BLATANT RIP-OFF

[Jim Riser]

Joe,
Yes, that's why I said "added to". Wilson's was three years later. Since others above were listing people who added to the concept, I thought I would mention Wilson for completeness. I think all who are commenting upon this thread have access to the original Jinx article and are aware of the 1939 date for James. Tabby even had the article on his web site.
Jim

[Jonathan Townsend]

I feel there is a significant difference between performing then publishing into the journals a variation on a popular theme and offering the props and apparatus to perform an item brought directly to market - and advertising such as "now you can do so and so's routine".

Early on I learned the item with two long shoelaces where you bring the middles under a hank and then show the laces are linked. Whose item is that and where was it published?

[Jim Riser]

For completeness of items which might have inspired Dean's Box, we probably should include Leon's Miniature Haunted House. My copy is in a box somewhere so I can not cite a date for this.

After compiling all such items into a list , we must consider if it is really a manufacturer's duty to list everything which might have been an inspiration for an item being manufactured. At what point can we assume that the buyer has some knowledge and pass at least part of this citing responsibility on to the customer?

If I manufacture a vanishing birdcage, can I assume that buyers know that it was inspired by DeKolta? Or do we assume that everyone is a Magic Cafe patron ignorant of any form of magic history? I choose to assume that buyers have some magic history background and I do not cite a history of the effect. I also assume and even state, that if the buyer lacks such knowledge perhaps he/she does not need the effect in question.

Please explain to me why some people feel that it is a manufacturer's responsibility to do all of the research and provide the complete history of the effect. I do not feel this way and will not attempt to list every possible reference to an effect. If that bothers people, they may do without my creation, make their own, or get it elsewhere. I really do not care. My job is to design and make reliable apparatus not to serve as a historian. I see no reason for Dean to list all possible inspirations for his product and think it is very "nervy" of people to try to push this on to him. And people wonder why magic builders are ceasing production ...
Jim

[Jim Riser]

I just found this listing with a 1940 date suggested:

http://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/7333128

I prefer this over James' cabinet.

Jim

[Jonathan Townsend]

Not sure the Leon item could be done closeup and tabletop. Maybe with a modern ITR.

[Roger M.]

I see no reason for Dean to list all possible inspirations for his product and think it is very "nervy" of people to try to push this on to him.

I'd posit that when phases #1 and #3 of what is only a 3 phase routine are identical to a marketed effect which pre-dates your own, you likely owe it to the craft to at the very least, note the fact that 66%+ of your current marketed routine is actually a routine developed by somebody else entirely, and the remaining 33% is heavily based on concepts developed by somebody other than yourself.

Anyway, the original point is that as wonderful as Dean's Box is as an effect, getting on a high horse about Chinese pirates stealing Dean's "original effect" is perhaps lacking somewhat in terms of accuracy.

Certain manufacturers threatening to quit making props as a result of folks requesting proper crediting is fundamentally irrelevant to this thread.

[Jim Riser]

Jon,
That's not the point. I listed this item as possible inspiration for Dean's Box not as something that could necessarily be performed under the same conditions.
Jim

[Jim Riser]

Roger,
Those are not threats. They are facts.

Let's take another item - the floating table. Can we agree that it is being ripped-off?

Yes, it has its roots way back in magic and borrows from Joe Karson and Tommy Wonder more recently yet no one seems to want Losander to cite "inspirations". Double standard here? Why are you not asking the Chinese pirates to cite "inspirations"? Why expect this only from Dean?

The magic dealer the OP mentioned is selling virtually all knock offs. Any thoughts on that?

Jim

[Jonathan Townsend]

What's the source of the shoelace item?

[Jim Riser]

I have no source for the shoelace effect, Jon.
Jim

[Doug Thornton]

Early on I learned the item with two long shoelaces where you bring the middles under a hank and then show the laces are linked. Whose item is that and where was it published?

I don't know an early publication. There is 'Linked' in "Paul Curry's Worlds Beyond".

[Doug Thornton]

...which goes back to "The Phoenix", No. 123, April 11,1947, p. 496.

[Jim Riser]

Thanks, Doug.
Jim

[Jonathan Townsend]

:) Thanks Doug

[Roger M.]

Jim, creators can release product without credit certainly.

There's no legal requirement to credit, and there's no legal penalty for those who fail to credit.

I would guess though, that one might have lost their right to yell "BLATANT RIP-OFF" if they themselves have used freely (and without credit) the ideas of those who have gone before them.

In the end, the only thing of note that might happen if if a creator fails to credit, is that somebody will likely come along after the fact and credit for them.

[Jim Riser]

Roger,
I think that has been attempted within this thread.

Crediting fully for inspiration is extremely difficult. An example ... I am making myself an oval vanishing birdcage. The original concept goes to DeKolta. I have seriously examined Jon Martin cages, Merv Taylor cages, and an unknown cage from Germany. Also to be used with the new cage will be items derived from Billy McComb, Jon Martin, George Hammerton, and unknown German gentlemen. Documenting these German people who created cages, reels, etc. gets iffy. Those who knew have died and many who make guesses are incorrect. The literature is incomplete and often incorrect.

There reaches a point where I can go no farther from my workshop in Tucson. Documenting can well be more difficult than the building of the items.

My direct inspiration comes from only a few sources but what went on before affected my sources indirectly. So, where does one stop with the crediting?

Any ideas?
Jim

[Joe Pecore]

Joe, Yes, that's why I said "added to".

Sorry, shouldn't have used "FYI". Maybe just "FI"? Really just meant to clearify for others that are reading who may not happen to know these time frames.

[Tom Stone]

Jim, creators can release product without credit certainly.

There's no legal requirement to credit

That depends on where you are living.

[Jim Riser]

Side note ... I just looked up the shoestring bit in The Phoenix. There are some great items in those old issues! I need to actually study the material. Check it out, guys.
Jim

[Tim Ellis]

And this thread is a great example as to why blatant rip-offs exist.

1 - Person sees a popular item that they can manufacture cheaper (as they don't need to factor in costs like research and development or marketing) so they reverse engineer it and often even steal the advertising copy as well so that buyers often are fooled into thinking they are purchasing the popular product at a cheap price

2 - Some magicians get up in arms about the rip-off

3 - Other magicians start debating whether the popular item was 100% original or not

4 - The copyist then uses THAT argument to justify his rip-off (ie: "Nothing is original in magic anyway."



I heard the exact same line from the owner of the Chinese magic company, King Magic, when I was taking him to PayPal for selling pirated products.


I also heard the same argument from the American manufacturer's of "Re-Pop" which tried to pass itself off as Anders Moden's "Healed and Sealed"



I see two very different cases of theft here.


1 - The case where you see a popular product and reverse engineer it and bring it out either as the original or with a slightly different name and call it the "generic" version

2 - The case where a new product is inspired by several items that have gone before it but fails to credit every earlier variation


Neither are illegal

In the case of the first example - I consider this highly unethical and pretty much blatant theft by deception. Someone asked earlier in the thread if it's ok to manufacture someone else's product because you can do it cheaper... in the case of DVD's, for example, we see that extensively in Asia where people sell magic DVDs (and Hollywood movies) for virtually the cost of burning a blank DVD and photocopying a cover. Is that justifiable in any way whatsoever? They have completely ignored the time and money spent producing the content of the DVD and the remuneration those content creators are entitled to. But even then, the DVD copyists will be undercut in price by those who provide the movie as a download.


In the second case, where a product is manufactured that has been inspired by those that have gone before it, I feel that it is part of the manufacturer's obligation to give a brief outline of the past items. I know it is not necessary but it does help educate the magic community as a whole in a time where magic history is sorely lacking. Many manufacturer's do this as a matter of course in the instructions to their products. Often, in the development of the product, you have a lot of notes about it's origin anyway. Frequently, when you send your new item out to friends and colleagues, you will be informed about similar items that already exist. (For example, when I was developing 'Perplexity', Boris Wild told me that part of the method was similar to Trevor Lewis's 'Orbital' now sold by Aldo Colombini. I contacted Aldo, showed him my effect, he had no problem with my version and I referenced 'Orbital' in the instructions even though I found out about it after coming up with my effect. It stops people from later arguing my effect is a "rip-off" and it provides people who like my trick with the opportunity to study other variations so they can customise the effect to suit themselves.


So, in summary, I really think Pete Biro's original post of drawing attention to a blatant, reverse engineered copy of 'Dean's Box' has been ignored as magicians have chosen instead to argue amongst themselves as to whether Dean gave proper credit to similar effects that came before his.

In the "real world" it's like someone stated that a woman was raped, and the rest of you started suggesting that it was because she was dressed too provocatively in the first place.

[Bill Mullins]

Anyone interested in Sefalaljia should see the full version that is presented in The James File Vol 2 p 2285.

[Ted M]

No.

Crediting and manufacture of magic tricks are NOTHING like rape.

No. No. No.

Such comparisons trivialize rape.

Please use other comparisons.

[Richard Kaufman]

True! Comparisons to rape trivialize the trauma of women around the world who suffer this horrible crime against their minds and bodies thousands of times a day.

Theft, yes.
Rape, no.

[Brad Henderson]

So how do we feel about james l Clark who has begun offering inexpensive versions of magic products (such as osterlind's blindfold and quantum bender)?

He seems to be taking the stance that as it is not illegal, it is his right to do whatever he wishes. One well known magician even seemed to defend him once saying that as we allow products to be released that are 'improvements', wouldn't offering an item at a lower price be considered an improvement?

He also began selling the work of a magician accused of sexual conduct with a minor allegedly on moral grounds. Does that change matters?

Allow me to be clear, I do not approve of anything Clark has done - regardless of his self made claims of being a polymath and humanitarian. Apparently his mentalism for dummies book is filled with material taken from other magicians, though I have not seen it nor will I buy a copy. (Though, if it's ok to sell the work of someone you feel has done wrong - as he did with curtin's material, does that not then grant position for others to copy clark's book as quid pro quo for his deeds? But I digress)

I mention James l Clark because he has several items one might consider rip offs, many magicians still buy from him, he's not Chinese, and the magic community neither officially nor at any grass roots level seems to be paying any attention - which for someone who consistently calls themselves a polymath and humanitarian might be the most fitting punishment of all. (then again I have read he is quick with threats of law suits - I've carefully written this post with that in mind - so perhaps that plays a factor).

Opinions?

[Richard Kaufman]

Unfortunately it is not a crime in the United States to copy and manufacture magic tricks created by other people. From the point of view of many in our community, this is an immoral thing to do, but it is not illegal.

The only protection is copyright, and ideas cannot be copyrighted.

Yeah, it sucks, but that's the state of things.

[Brad Henderson]

But if as a community we believe it to be 'wrong' we can take action through public condemnation, shunning, and refusing to do business with the person whose actions with whom we disagree, or with those who do business with them. The world magic clubs claim to have codes of ethics and some even have committees apparently meant to enforce them.

Are these merely facades?

Why is it people like Clark still have a voice in the community to promote and sell their wares? Seems like Brooks at the cafe, who has no problem with censorship, could easily strangle the ability of Clark and others to advertise word of their product.

Instead Tom stone and others get banned for daring to suggest that theft is not a practice we should condone.

Will the magic world ever remain upside down, or is their hope yet ?

[Jim Riser]

Brad;
Facades, yes.

Hope? I do not see any.
Jim

[Richard Kaufman]

You're pissing in the wind, Brad.

The only thing that counts is the law: you can't make new law. Who declared you the king?

Many magicians will buy things at the lowest price available--this is learned behavior taught to them by our materialistic society.

Public condemnation of someone who is not breaking the law could easily constitute libel or slander.

The so-called code of ethics of magic organizations or the MDA is meaningless.

The so-called "magic world" is NOT upside down: it is merely moving in the same direction as the rest of society. Kicking and screaming about it will not make any difference.

[Roger M.]

Kicking and screaming about it will not make any difference.

I actually sense that it will and does make a difference Richard.

It's just fundamentally ineffective when only a few people are willing to take the stand, and more often than not those few people get branded "crazies" and "troublemakers" for their efforts, banned from forums, and generally marginalized.

Of course the optics can be difficult to judge when those "crazies" are 100% more passionate about what it is they're trying to put across than the miscreants who couldn't care less about something as unimportant as "stolen magic tricks".

There is an massive and endemic complacency towards the manufacture and marketing of bootlegged effects that runs deeply through the entire swath of amateur and professional magic.

[Q. Kumber]

The world magic clubs claim to have codes of ethics and some even have committees apparently meant to enforce them.

Are these merely facades?

Sadly yes. A few years ago an entrant in the annual British Ring Shield competition did Lance Burton's act with music, idiosyncrancies and mannerisms. He was rewarded with first prize.

[Brad Henderson]

I know i don't buy from people who steal. Many on here won't

So, what's the difference?

I think it's knowledge and education. I personally have spoken with local magicians who bought knock off stuff who confessed - 'I never even thought of it that way.'

Many in magic just don't know we as a community try to respect those who create new and interesting ideas.

Of course, if no one is willing to speak up, if communities and forums allow and condone such theft - nothing will ever change.

And yes, you absolutely can condemn people for non illegal behaviors. Ee do it all the time. Of course, I happen to believe of I said the sky is blue, Rk would disagree with me on principle but that's neither here nor there.

Some magicians speak up when they see wrong being done and take action to prevent further one's. In the absence of legal remedies, public condemnation is all we have. And it has a proven track record for revealing the truth and even eliciting change.

But we have to be consistent. We can't take sides based
On popularity and politics.

I think a good first step would be to generate a 'best practices' manifesto of some sort. No one is king. But at least it's a modern document that people can point to as an example of how to ethically succeed in the magic world. I believe, if it is thoughtfully composed and indeed represents ethical principles applied to our art, people will take it as a guide because - well, because it's correct.

I believe there are enough successful smart artistic magicians who, while perhaps disagreeing on specifics, are in agreement on overall principles. I believe there is monolithic acceptance of certain ethical ideals held by those who seriously practice the art.

While no one can be compelled to follow them, I do believe that awareness and adherence to these principles will allow others to suceed ethically (and I believe most people want success and if giving a choice would prefer to acquire it ethically) and it becomes one's best interest to take them as a guide.

I believe we need to be clear about what we as a community feel are best practices, and (ideally) hold ourselves to that standard. I know it can be done - I see magicians like stone, weber, Meade, and others live it daily.

Rk might call it pissing in the wind. Seems to me to be the better alternative to doing nothing.

I guess it depends on whether you care enough to try.

I do. Have been working on a project like this for a bit but want/need others involved. No kings - but the combined voices of a community.

Will keep you posted as things grow,

Forever pissing,

Brad

[Brad Henderson]

Btw. Here's what I got so far:

1) originality is to be valued and protected.
2) history is to be respected and preserved.

Everything else is really just explanation.

Anyone disagree with the above as guiding principles of ethical best practices?

[Jonathan Townsend]

@Brad, an open market is governed by the rules of common law. It's as simple as that. There is no ASCAP special to magic and folks here don't ordinarily file their works as plays to gain copyright protection of that sort.

@Pete, thanks for the notice that Mad Hatter Magic is engaged in the sort of business I don't wish to support. I won't seek to purchase items from them and may also avoid those with any advertising and celebrity associations with them by way of their website and online fora.

@Brad - look at the above carefully.

@RK - I believe we can say what needs saying without resort to discussing rape - which is unfortunately still happening all too often in our world at large. Also that and seems an ironic and strange topic for men to project into/onto/about.

[Richard Kaufman]

Magic effects have been copied and sold SINCE THE BEGINNING: since before the first magic dealers opened their doors in the mid 1800s. It has always been this way.
ALWAYS.

Magicians will buy copies because they coast less.
It has always been that way and it always will.

Instead of wasting your breath, and our time, carrying on about something that has always been happening, and always will be happening, why don't you do something useful like helping to get some young people interested in doing magic so it doesn't die out, which is where its heading RIGHT NOW.

[Tim Ellis]

Wow.



I'm lost for words.



Out of my entire post all you got was that I was comparing magic tricks to rape

"Crediting and manufacture of magic tricks are NOTHING like rape."


Read it again.

I was comparing the ARGUMENTS people use to justify the two things, not comparing THEFT to RAPE.


The fact that my entire post was dismissed and ignored simply because someone chose to twist my words into a sensationalist spin is EXACTLY the point of my entire post.


Pete Biro's original post was TWISTED into a debate about whether Dean's Box was 100% original or not.

Mine was derailed by trying to make it look like I was equating the act of THEFT to the act of RAPE.


If you truly cannot see the point I was making about the flawed logic in the argument

"In the "real world" it's like someone stated that a woman was raped, and the rest of you started suggesting that it was because she was dressed too provocatively in the first place."

then don't read any further into this post.



JAMES CLARK
If this is true and Clark is now selling rip-offs then this is very sad.

He was, years ago, a vocal opponent of piracy in all forms. He was, as was stated above, one of those branded a "crazy" and a "troublemaker" as he tried all sorts of methods to combat piracy.

He actually got the owner of a huge torrent site to see the "error of his ways" and this kid is now a leader in the youth magic community with a successful and ethical web empire.

However, I can see how Clark, who was constantly attacked by equally vocal members of the magic community who felt that piracy was a part of life and should be left alone, may well have decided "if you can't beat'em, join'em".



CHINA
Yes, there are several major magic manufacturing companies in China (that all seem to be related: King Magic, 52Magic etc) that simply copy popular products and release generic items. There are also several companies in the USA, Europe and other countries too that do this.

The difference I see is that there are a LOT of very vocal magic organisations in China who are trying to do something about this. Some are appealing to colleagues on a moral and ethical ground (like the campaign in Busan, Korea "Don't Copy The Magic") and others are trying to appeal to the government to change the law to offer copyright protection to magicians.

There are some magicians in Asia who have been performing copy acts or using pirated illusions who are now being shunned by their colleagues when they refuse to do the right thing and purchase originals.

My point is, Asia is aware of the piracy problem and is actively trying to do something about it.

I get at least two emails a week from Asian magicians asking for advice and guidance because they want to do the right thing.

If they come to the Genii Forum and look at this thread, what advice do they find here:


"Magic effects have been copied and sold SINCE THE BEGINNING: since before the first magic dealers opened their doors in the mid 1800s. It has always been this way.
ALWAYS.
Magicians will buy copies because they coast less.
It has always been that way and it always will.
Instead of wasting your breath, and our time, carrying on about something that has always been happening, and always will be happening, why don't you do something useful like helping to get some young people interested in doing magic so it doesn't die out, which is where its heading RIGHT NOW"


Don't waste your breath.

Perhaps we should take Richard's advice to heart and do what it appears James Clark has done... if you can't beat'em, join'em.



THE FUTURE OF MAGIC
Richard does then change the focus of the discussion to the apparent lack of young people getting into magic.

That may be the case in the USA, but in Asia the MAJORITY of magicians are under 30.

Why? Because they have role models. Korea, for example, had nothing really going magically until Lee Eun Gyeol came on the scene. He won international awards for his magic and became almost a "hero" in Korea. He started a magic company, magic clubs in schools across the country, and his live concerts and TV shows literally inspired a generation. Now there are University courses in magic, one of the world's biggest magic festivals in Busan, and some of the most exciting magic coming out of one small country that I've seen in years.

In the USA, a country that for so long had an iconic magician setting the standard on TV: Mark Wilson, Doug Henning, David Copperfield, David Blaine... you no longer have a role model for the young generation to aspire to. That's why there are few young magicians at conventions anymore. But there are STILL many, many young magic enthusiasts.. it's just that they are sitting in their bedrooms using YOUTUBE as their Tarbell Course. Figure out how to teach them that magic is only magic if you get out and PERFORM it and you may see a resurgence in the USA too.

But if they get exposed to magic mentors whose attitude is "Don't waste your breath" then don't be surprised if you get an entire generation of copyists who don't value intellectual property at all.



As long as I have breath I'm going to follow the lead of the Koreans and say "Don't Copy The Magic" and, hopefully, some others will agree and spread the message.

I don't think it's a waste at all.

[Tim Ellis]

As an amusing coincidence.. A few minutes after I made that post, an Asian magician messaged me saying


"Wow tim!!! Raping magic wow!!! agree to thx :)"


After a very confusing exchange it turned out that his comment was not related to this post at all.. he had just watched me on YouTube and was impressed by my "RAPPING Magic"... what a difference one letter makes

[Richard Kaufman]

Sorry, Tim, but you're exactly right: I did this ...

"In the "real world" it's like someone stated that a woman was raped, and the rest of you started suggesting that it was because she was dressed too provocatively in the first place."

then don't read any further into this post.

I didn't read any further into the post.

[Richard Kaufman]

However, my point still stands, and you have ignored it. The copying of magic tricks started with professional magicians stealing one another's tricks.

Then, when magic shops started to open in the mid 1800s, they began to copy the tricks of professional magicians and sell them. And they copied each other's tricks and sold those!

And this has gone on, unabated, for over 150 years, long before the Chinese got into the act.

I do not support it: I STRONGLY CONDEMN IT. However, my head is not in the sand. I see what has happened in the past and see no reason that things will change in the future. There will ALWAYS be people who will take advantage of others. The world will forever be divided into nice folks who respect the rights of others and scumbags who don't. If you think that will change, then you have stars in your eyes.

[Tim Ellis]

So Richard, you genuinely don't understand that my point was the illogical ARGUMENT that people use to "justify" rape is the same as the illogical ARGUMENT people are using to "justify" the copying of a magic prop?

Do you SINCERELY believe I was comparing the act of theft to the act of rape?

[Tim Ellis]

And no, I haven't ignored it. I am well aware when copying started and how it has gone unabated for years.

The fact that you strongly condemn it hasn't been clear until your last post. Though someone who strongly condemns something doesn't normally accept there is nothing anyone can do that will change it.

It seems like you simply accept it as a part of life, one you don't like, but you feel impotent to change.