Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Teller on theft in magic

esquire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 80 posts

Re: Teller on theft in magic

#71

Post by ZoFreX »

AndyNemmity wrote: post #66
ZoFreX wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the article? That is not the same video or trick that Teller is suing over. Article version: > Against a crimson curtain, Bakardy had erected an easel with what looked like a large pad of white paper on it. Perhaps six feet in front of the easel sat a small wood table bearing a glass Coke bottle filled with water. That bottle also contained a single rose. A spotlight, outside of the camera's view, cast t…

I read the article. I have followed the case when it was initially brought by Teller, and have read the legal documents he put forth. It is not the same video, it is the same trick done with different patter, and feel. Sorry if that is not clear, I can tell by the reading the intention I was trying to convey was not the intention people got. He reuploaded him doing the trick with different patter, not the same video.

Obviously I can't speak for Teller but based on the fact the reasoning he presents in the OP article would not apply to the linked video, I don't think he would have a problem with it.

The article specifically mentions treating a magic act as a performance and copyrighting it in a similar manner to a play - this video is a substantially different act to his. The video described in the article however is a straight rip-off.

Re: Teller on theft in magic

#73

Post by gyom »

lmm wrote: post #69
eli wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example, just because I scan an old book doesn't mean I should own a copyright on the scan. Just to play devils advocate, why not? Wouldn't that result in many more old books being scanned that otherwise wouldn't be? Wouldn't competition force down the price of the popular old books?

That's a backwards way to look at it. Copyright is a very powerful protection, we sacrifice a lot for it (look at all the creativity that's still going on around Sherlock Holmes, or in illegal fanfiction for more recent works, and think how much more creative expression there might be if more cultural icons were without copyright). The bar to justify extending copyright to something new should be set high; I'd rather…

Just think about how George Lucas clearly wasn't the best person to write the Star Wars prequels.

I would gladly pay for a well-written IP-infringing new version of Matrix 2-3 instead of the official crap that the rights owners put out.

Re: Teller on theft in magic

#74

Post by lukevdp »

eric_bullington wrote: post #33
modeless wrote: post #21

As staunch libertarians, I would have thought that Penn and Teller would be against such strong IP protection.

Did you read the whole article? The ends suggests a twist.

They only do stuff like that when it's totally awesome... like faking Big foot: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xll6vp_sonoma-bigfoot-video...

Re: Teller on theft in magic

#75

Post by pydave »

einhverfr wrote: post #63
thaumaturgy wrote: post #36

I think the most common argument I hear against IP protections for software is that so much of it is obvious, or incremental. We have companies patenting and suing over techniques which are considered common knowledge by many programmers. How silly was it that Oracle's recent huge lawsuit ended up hinging on a range check function? But is that the same as a masterful magic trick? And if not, should we treat it the sa…

I am fine with the literary aspects of it being protected provided that the practical aspects are not, or vice versa. Of if Teller wants the practical aspects protected, he can file for a patent, providing directions for someone reasonably skilled in the art, to understand what he is doing. What I am not fine with is this idea that IP is protected for its own sake. We need to remember that it is a quid quo pro, and n…

  > I am fine with the literary aspects of it being protected 
  > provided that the practical aspects are not
I guess you're thinking along the lines of a playwright who sells scripts of her play, but cannot prevent people from performing the play (since they already bought the script)?

Re: Teller on theft in magic

#77

Post by teyc »

taking this back to technology, and I'm thinking of Apple vs Samsung here. What do you all think?

Is scroll bounce magical, the way Teller's Shadow is? It is a lie, we all know that digital screens do not have bounces, and that's what surprises us and pleases us. What about slide to unlock?

Honestly, I'm torn by this. As much as I cherish things magical, I couldn't see how public interests would be served by giving these illusions exclusivity.

Re: Teller on theft in magic

#78

Post by einhverfr »

pydave wrote: post #75
einhverfr wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am fine with the literary aspects of it being protected provided that the practical aspects are not, or vice versa. Of if Teller wants the practical aspects protected, he can file for a patent, providing directions for someone reasonably skilled in the art, to understand what he is doing. What I am not fine with is this idea that IP is protected for its own sake. We need to remember that it is a quid quo pro, and n…

> I am fine with the literary aspects of it being protected > provided that the practical aspects are not I guess you're thinking along the lines of a playwright who sells scripts of her play, but cannot prevent people from performing the play (since they already bought the script)?

More along the lines that if you don't disclose how you do the illusion you can't prevent other people from publishing write-ups or selling kits to do something similar.

Then magic tricks can all be patented, and protected for the life of the patent. Interested amateurs can look up the patents, but magicians can rest assured that few in their audience will take that step. Seems like a perfect tradeoff to me.

Re: Teller on theft in magic

#79

Post by ajanuary »

AndyNemmity wrote: post #67
ajanuary wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Judging by the description of the video in the article, this isn't the same video.

It isn't the same video, it's the same trick. He has uploaded a new version of the same trick in an attempt to get past the removal that Teller did of the previous video.

I read your comment as "the style is different, and you shouldn't be able to protect effect, so Teller shouldn't be persuing this." Which is obviously a flawed argument if the style is the same. Apologies if I misinterpreted your comment.

Re: Teller on theft in magic

#80

Post by AndyNemmity »

ZoFreX wrote: post #71
AndyNemmity wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the article. I have followed the case when it was initially brought by Teller, and have read the legal documents he put forth. It is not the same video, it is the same trick done with different patter, and feel. Sorry if that is not clear, I can tell by the reading the intention I was trying to convey was not the intention people got. He reuploaded him doing the trick with different patter, not the same video.

Obviously I can't speak for Teller but based on the fact the reasoning he presents in the OP article would not apply to the linked video, I don't think he would have a problem with it. The article specifically mentions treating a magic act as a performance and copyrighting it in a similar manner to a play - this video is a substantially different act to his. The video described in the article however is a straight ri…

However Teller does have a problem with it. He doesn't want him to sell the trick, and the trick that is occurring has nothing to do with the performance.
Post reply on HN