Teller on theft in magic
esquire.com
Teller on theft in magic
1–10 of 80 posts
Re: Teller on theft in magic
#2Especially interesting when viewed in the context of recent patent disputes in the tech world. To hear Teller talk and to hear his performances described conveys that ethereal, intangible quality that "the real thing" has and that knockoffs generally fail to capture — a quality that seems instinctively to be deserving of protection.
Re: Teller on theft in magic
#3Gerard Bakardy reuploaded his version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkq4XfFgCYs
The style couldn't be more different. The "effect" is the same, but the style is light years apart.
I don't believe you should be able to copyright an effect, and it's likely he's not even using the same effect.
I understand Teller wants to protect an idea he came up with, but I think it's protected simply by the grace and beauty of his version.
Re: Teller on theft in magic
#4Gerard Bakardy reuploaded his version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkq4XfFgCYs The style couldn't be more different. The "effect" is the same, but the style is light years apart. I don't believe you should be able to copyright an effect, and it's likely he's not even using the same effect. I understand Teller wants to protect an idea he came up with, but I think it's protected simply by the grace and beauty of his…
That's the big question, with a universal application: that tension between the fact that knockoffs have a diluting effect on the original, and the idea that if your idea can so readily be copied it's perhaps not worthy of protection.
Re: Teller on theft in magic
#5Gerard Bakardy reuploaded his version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkq4XfFgCYs The style couldn't be more different. The "effect" is the same, but the style is light years apart. I don't believe you should be able to copyright an effect, and it's likely he's not even using the same effect. I understand Teller wants to protect an idea he came up with, but I think it's protected simply by the grace and beauty of his…
That's the big question, with a universal application: that tension between the fact that knockoffs have a diluting effect on the original, and the idea that if your idea can so readily be copied it's perhaps not worthy of protection.
The magician's creed is a lot like an open source license with the restriction of attribution. If attribution is given then copying is considered respectable, whereas if it's not then it's considered theft.
Re: Teller on theft in magic
#6Gerard Bakardy reuploaded his version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkq4XfFgCYs The style couldn't be more different. The "effect" is the same, but the style is light years apart. I don't believe you should be able to copyright an effect, and it's likely he's not even using the same effect. I understand Teller wants to protect an idea he came up with, but I think it's protected simply by the grace and beauty of his…
I understand Teller wants to protect an idea he came up with
Given how much Penn & Teller built their careers on exposing the tricks of other magicians who had guarded their secrets for decades (and getting a lot of stage magicians made at the duo), it's pretty ironic for Teller to now decide he wants government protection for a trick of his.
Disclaimer: esquire.com is not working for me right now so I haven't read the original article yet; I'm basing this on your comment.
Re: Teller on theft in magic
#7What's true for magic is true for tech: "Invention is all fuzzy, sloppy stuff"
Re: Teller on theft in magic
#8Especially interesting when viewed in the context of recent patent disputes in the tech world. To hear Teller talk and to hear his performances described conveys that ethereal, intangible quality that "the real thing" has and that knockoffs generally fail to capture — a quality that seems instinctively to be deserving of protection.
If the "knockoffs" can't capture it, why does it need protection? The logic doesn't work there. You could just as easily defend the cynical interpretation that Teller is looking to "defend" (via the monopoly status of his tricks) his quite substantial revenue stream. That doesn't seem so deserving of protection to me.
Re: Teller on theft in magic
#9Gerard Bakardy reuploaded his version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkq4XfFgCYs The style couldn't be more different. The "effect" is the same, but the style is light years apart. I don't believe you should be able to copyright an effect, and it's likely he's not even using the same effect. I understand Teller wants to protect an idea he came up with, but I think it's protected simply by the grace and beauty of his…
I understand Teller wants to protect an idea he came up with Given how much Penn & Teller built their careers on exposing the tricks of other magicians who had guarded their secrets for decades (and getting a lot of stage magicians made at the duo), it's pretty ironic for Teller to now decide he wants government protection for a trick of his. Disclaimer: esquire.com is not working for me right now so I haven't read t…
I don't agree with you that Penn and Teller built their careers on exposing tricks of other magicians.
They do a couple exposures. Cups and Balls, Blast off, and a new escape in their act that you can choose to cover your eyes for or not.
Cups and Balls and Blast Off aren't exactly carefully guarded secrets... what are you referring to?
Re: Teller on theft in magic
#10Especially interesting when viewed in the context of recent patent disputes in the tech world. To hear Teller talk and to hear his performances described conveys that ethereal, intangible quality that "the real thing" has and that knockoffs generally fail to capture — a quality that seems instinctively to be deserving of protection.
If the "knockoffs" can't capture it, why does it need protection? The logic doesn't work there. You could just as easily defend the cynical interpretation that Teller is looking to "defend" (via the monopoly status of his tricks) his quite substantial revenue stream. That doesn't seem so deserving of protection to me.
My take on the article was that the fight is against taking something beautiful and magical and making it pedestrian through unartful performance.