Techdirt: A few years back, we wrote about how the magic industry was an example of a creative industry that thrived without intellectual property protection. As we noted at the time:
The magic community uses social norms to reward those who discover new magic tricks and punishes those who disclose them to non-magicians.
12 comments:
This is too bad. Partly because there is a part of me that says 'its magic, they arent supposed to belittle themselves with petty things like lawsuits'. Like the article says, they had their own system of controlling problems. The other part of me doesnt like it because, they should be like a brotherhood and if someone is stealing from another, then they should handle it. I guess doing it this way makes them seem so much more corporate. But on the flip side, if they didnt steal the trick and a bunch of people know it then like I said before it really is just pettiness. But I guess it really is the nature of things, they are only human and suffer from all of those attributes
This suit doesn't make any sense to me! The fact that one magician does a trick and another does the same, that is just the nature of the industry. Did they accomplish the same trick through the same means? The "magic" of being a magician is engineering the mechanics of the trick, finding ways of creating phenomenon while concealing how that phenomenon was triggered. Not to mention the theatricality of the magician is a huge part of the performance. So with this in mind, I am not in agreement that the magician from the Netherlands should have been sued. Even if it was the "same trick," a lot of how that trick is received has to do with how he or she engages the audience, and THAT is far more personalized.
In order for this to be copyright infringement, the trick would have to be copyrighted, yeah? So if the mechanics are well known as the article says, did the originator copyright a script for the bit? Were there mechanics involved whose design was registered as the originator's intellectual property with a governing agency? It's too bad the fellow's trick got ripped off, and by his former employer no less, but it seems that from the circumstances he was lucky to have gotten the ruling he did.
This suit is a perfect example of why intellectual property laws and their implications have always confused me. Like Sonia said, I definitely think that someone should be penalized if they blatantly steal a unique idea from someone else. But part of me suspects that the man who is being sued is not lying about being one of many that perform the trick in question. How do you regulate magic tricks and keep track of who invented them and who's taking specific trick ideas from someone else? I think a major part of the problem is that there is not already a system in place for this kind of IP tracking regulation. Since there's no documentation of who first came up with the exact trick and who performed it first, who's to say that this guy should owe the other one so much money for simply performing a magic trick that others have probably performed too? It's a sticky situation. I like to think that the honor system could just keep working for the magic world, but unfortunately there are some shady characters in every industry who should certainly be held accountable for these types of wrong-doings.
I often feel like we have lost the point of copyright. The difficult line to walk is between protecting artists from being taken advantage of while still allowing and encouraging the spread of ideas and innovation. All of the great inventions throughout history have been based upon those that have come before. If sharing and collaborating is punished and discouraged through copyright protection, is it actually protecting artists and their art. All art is a discussion. How are we able to have a discussion without using the same vocabulary. On the flip side, will allowing this sharing prevent people from coming up with new and interesting ideas.
I find this article very amusing. The best part of the article are there comments posted on the website. Why do we feel that suing is always the answers? If this magician can sue for a trick then there are several other fields that can sue others. A carpenter could sue another carpenter for hammering a nail the same way. These lines are very blurry.
Copyright does cover any expression, whether written, performed, or otherwise created. I'll have to disagree with what's written above that the trick isn't copyrighted, unlike patents copyrights are established by the creation of the work itself. A content creator can then register their copyright which makes enforcement of the copyright easier, but it's still not what creates the copyright. Now the problem comes in where it might be someone else's copyright, if the original magician was also copying some third magician then it doesn't mean the guy that had to pay wasn't infringing, it would only mean that he paid the wrong person.
So in the US, copyright explicitly doesn't cover things that are better covered by patents including processes, inventions, or other things such as facts, trade secrets, and titles. But this is in the Netherlands - you're guess is as good as mine. I think the more substantial discussion is about how these are not independently created tricks, but part of a much larger tradition of magic tricks where tricks are borrowed, improved, modified, or adjusted all the time. As such, the concept of copyright does not map very clearly to these works, but there still might be some concept of protecting creators of original works. Perhaps a patent is more appropriate, or perhaps logical thought from this point will lead, once again, to a collapse of the intellectual property concept.
It's kinda sad to see copyright starting to travel over the world of magic, of all things. It was interesting to read in the article how generally magicians are able to take care of things themselves and reward magicians who come up with new original content, and punish others who divulge their secrets. It's disappointing that that system may not be viable anymore, and that they are having to resort to the normal method, which is through the courts, which often doesn't seem to be the best method of sorting things out. It's really disappointing that something like magic can still be brought out of their own world and be brought down to the petty level of fighting things over in the courts.
The thing about magic tricks and illusions is that Magician's lifework is based off of what unique illusions they can bring to the stage. I wouldn't pay for a ticket to go see a trick performed using a technique that i can find online for 5 dollars. as the age old cliche says "a magician never reveals his trick"
However, If an illusionist is talented enough they can on average be able to figure out how other magicians perform tricks. That is a technique which, as far as I am aware of, is not a patent-able. Any illusionist who actually performs the exact same trick is no different then a guitar player playing Pinball wizard then smashing his guitar and claiming he wrote it.
I wish that this article had more information. It makes me sad that the magicians had to settle this in court. I always like the camaraderie and the brotherhood that the magic industry seemed to poses. It seems as if that tradition is dying away. In a world where people use every chance that they can get to get more money it does not surprise me that this happened.
IP is IP: It never accrued to me that a magician would do this but, when I think about it. It makes perfect since. This is how a magician makes their living, they worked hard on that trick, and having everyone do it would affect there lively hood. I wonder what other artists would have IP right that I never thought of before.
Post a Comment