Master Levitation System

[Llero]

Except that Mesika is actually a very talented magician, and is giving us a tool that we couldn't have otherwise.

Do you think that the Electric Touch is just another form of palm buzzer, then?

 

[Justin.Morris]

Except that Mesika is actually a very talented magician, and is giving us a tool that we couldn't have otherwise.

Do you think that the Electric Touch is just another form of palm buzzer, then?

I think you missed his point entirely. He is not upset about the electric reel (which is a nice addition to the classic reel), or Mesika's talents, but he's upset about Mesika's ethics as a fellow magician, and an inventor.

And OneCardWonder, I do agree about the ethics. To clarify my earlier post, you can do a lot with a reel using multiple hookups. You are right that the ring trick uses the fearson hookup, and that's why it works. But that is one trick. I don't own it, but I would assume the other effects use different 'hookups', which makes the product far more versatile than you are giving it credit for. - especially if the hookup of the reel itself doesn't require clothes. That is a huge advancement as far as reels go.

Would I buy this product? Meh, probably not. I respect Fearson as a person and would not want to support someone who has stolen intellectual property. But if I had one, would I feel bad about using it? No. I have fearsons hookup, and I'm intelligent enough to put the two together regardless.

j

 

[OneCardWonder]

I think you missed his point entirely. He is not upset about the electric reel (which is a nice addition to the classic reel), or Mesika's talents, but he's upset about Mesika's ethics as a fellow magician, and an inventor.

Absolutely my point jt, thank you.

And OneCardWonder, I do agree about the ethics. To clarify my earlier post, you can do a lot with a reel using multiple hookups. You are right that the ring trick uses the fearson hookup, and that's why it works. But that is one trick. I don't own it, but I would assume the other effects use different 'hookups', which makes the product far more versatile than you are giving it credit for. - especially if the hookup of the reel itself doesn't require clothes.

The ring trick, moving the card, in fact most of it is seemingly accomplished by the Fearson hookup and a reel. Even the money flying from the table and into his hand can all be accomplished by the Fearson hookup. The only addition is seemingly the reel, and I've seen no evidence that this can be done naked. (Save one over excited review, which I have heard and seen direct contradiction to.) This product is billed as being flash-able as hell in every regard, and all other feedback I've read supports that fact.

But this is digression.

Would I buy this product? Meh, probably not. I respect Fearson as a person and would not want to support someone who has stolen intellectual property. But if I had one, would I feel bad about using it? No. I have fearsons hookup, and I'm intelligent enough to put the two together regardless.

This is absolutely my point. As I stated in the dark and misty past before my magical sabbatical I actually used a reel (Not electrical, but a reel none the less) with a hookup (which I didn't invent) and I didn't feel bad about -using- the effect. The reasons I didn't feel bad are:

1) I didn't rob from the artist. I paid for the literature from the creator of the hook up I used at the time and
2) I didn't support the process of magical theft in progress by paying someone who did rob from the artist.


I also didn't then sell that concept for 70 bucks as my own creation because its 1) not true and 2) the applications of a small and concealable reel to 'it' are so obvious as to not constitute true invention.

I don't doubt the man's talent as a magician or a performer. He's clearly far better than I, but I'm not judging his magic or his talent. I'm questioning the attitude that its OK to buy this product. Its -not- OK. He's added something obvious to what is most likely someone else's work and then not provided credit for it and is charging people $70.

Frankly......I could produce the same thing on my own right now for about $5 bucks and the soldering iron in my tool shed and probably spend less time than watching the DVD to get it to do some cool ****. Maybe I should produce a DVD? Call it 'SPIDER' and not credit anyone. The reason being my reel would be controlled remotely by some buttons in my shoe and my toes. Novelty....bleagh.

This boils down to some on this forum believing that a small concealable electronic reel is worth 70 bucks, because that's really all the new data you're going to get, and to make matters worse to believe that even though this effect more than likely has stolen someone else's idea at its foundation, that's OK too. That makes me extremely sad.

 

[illusionist14]

He's added something obvious to what is most likely someone else's work and then not provided credit for it and is charging people $70.

\[/QUOTE]
He gave full credit to Steven Fearson and has gotten full permission from him.

 

[OneCardWonder]

Steve has graciously granted me permission to forward the following email on to forums:

"Regarding the Café thing, I'm not sure who's word they are taking over
mine. Yigal has said nothing. Kaufman has not bothered to ask me
before making his claims and I'm certain he's seen no proof because
none exists.

Yigal claims on his DVD he bought the rights and it's a huge problem.
I've asked him to provide proof and he can not.

I'd post on the Café myself but I'm not allowed to. The whole thing
is ridiculous. The burden of proof is not on me, it is on Yigal.

Everyone is acting so strange, it's to the point they're somehow in
denial that the material on these demos is mine. I invented the
hookup yigal is using 20 years ago. Sometimes I sell the rights to
people to use in a project. David Blaine, Mike Ammar, but I never
sold Yigal rights to use it in his Tarantula project. Tell me what
part of that is hard to understand?

I also didn't really grant permission to Yigal in 1999 for the
Sunglasses. He asked for permission and I didn't respond right away.
By the time I got back to him to say no, he had already went to print
with it, saying friends had told him since I didn't get back to him he
could just take it!

I managed to convince him that we at least needed a small financial
agreement for use in the Sunglasses (which wasn't easy), simply as
damage control on my part. To ensure I'd be credited or else others
would assume you can just use my work. Also out of fairness for
everyone else, who had paid for the use. To that date, nobody had
ever used my hookup without paying for it.

We made a deal on that trick only, and what else could I do? He had
already taken it. He failed to conform to certain parts of that
agreement, so you can bet there was no way I'd be willing to do it
again for Tarantula. But this time he didn't bother asking. Instead
he's tried claiming rights for the use which he clearly does not have.
We have a written contract from 1999 specifically for the floating
sunglasses. Nothing else. I would never sell unlimited rights to
anyone. Especially someone who used my material for profit without
first receiving permission.

I have been in touch with Yigal over the past week and he has not been
able to show me anything that gave him rights to use this in
Tarantula. Instead he now says I should be happy with credit because
my work isn't patented so anyone can take it without even giving
credit. That is highly debatable. Now he seems to want to work
something out but the damage has been done already. I'm not sure what
my next course of action will be.

I hate seeing you get bashed around over this.

Feel free to forward this to the Café if you think they honestly care.
Maybe it will help them to believe you.


Steve"


There you have it.

He gave full credit to Steven Fearson and has gotten full permission from him.

Yeah....looks like that's what happened. Unless you have extremely compelling proof of that fact (i.e. a contradictory e-mail from Steve Fearson written more recently than this one) then I'm not buying that.

 

[Michael Kras]

He's added something obvious to what is most likely someone else's work and then not provided credit for it and is charging people $70.

\

He gave full credit to Steven Fearson and has gotten full permission from him.[/QUOTE]


That's not true at all.. Yigal NEVER obtained permission. He states in a letter that he did, but he did not. He DID, however, obtain rights to use Steve's sunglass animation in 1999 and that was done in an unethical manner. Not only does Yigal think that Fearson's hookup is "public domain up for grabs" but also seems to think that, in obtaining rights to ONE Fearson effect, that he now has access to anything of his.

By the way, a new trailer has been posted. http://emagicsupply.com/112-mlstrailer-71-custom.html

 

[jcherry]

I just visited The Magic Cafe and read through all the Tarantula threads. My question is for you Michael, with all due respect. Why are you fighting Steve's battle? Why does Steve need a teenager coming to his aid? This makes no sense to me. Has he given you this mission to defend his name and honor? Let these two professionals handle this on their own. Let us make our own decision whether we want to purchase one product or the other. Bill Palmer said it great over at the Cafe when he stated that Steve's method was found in an old German book from the 1970's, so he didn't reinvent the wheel. I think you should just drop this, because you're only coming off as irritating.

John

You seem to be only informed from one side (Fearson's- which is biased by the way) so here's a link for you to see the other side. Or, if you will, the Rest of the Story (R.I.P. Paul Harvey)
http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=300146&forum=109&start=150

 

[Michael Kras]

I haven't been appointed as his voice or anything, he's just a friend and I just wanted to help him clear the air. I apologize if I came off as particularly defensive or irritating.

However, Yigal's side of the story doesn't hold much ground. First of all, Fearson's hook-up is not "public domain" as he so claims, plus he did not obtain the rights in 1999 at all... in 1999 he obtained rights to Fearson's Sunglasses Animation, which has nothing to do with his hook-up. Even that was obtained unethically... Steve hastily worked out a deal with Yigal AFTER
Yigal had sent the product to print, because apparently Yigal thought Fearson's sunglasses effect was public domain too.

 

[jcherry]

First, Yigal did not claim it is or was Public domain, read it again. He is merely stating that if Steve's hook-up were patented it would be public domain by now.

Second, you STILL only know Steve's side. Unless you were present when the deal was being initiated, hashed out, then don't present what you "know" as fact. If this is about ethics, then where's your defense of Yigal when he states that Steve has jacked his ideas as well? No comments on Steve's youtube video that Yigal references? All in all, Steve is a professional and he's a man. Whether he's your friend or not, let him handle this himself.

John

 

[Fearson]

Just wanted to take a minute to hopefully clear things up a bit.

With all due respect, please don't toss that Bill Palmer quote around as fact until you've investigated it yourself. It has already been proven to be untrue by more than one authority. At best Bill made a mistake, at worst it was a lie he hoped would spread. My work appears in none of the Braco books. It's not debatable, it's not in there.

I appreciate Michael's defensive stance online just as I appreciate anyone who would stick up for me when lies are being told. I agree though that it's not necessary at this point. Both parties involved have made a statement and the statements are obviously in conflict.

It's up to you to decide who is telling the truth. Who has motive to lie and who the burden of proof rests on. Then again, Yigal's attack on me is a personal matter which isn't necessarily helped by being aired in public. I've had extensive communications with him regarding this and he's been unable to offer me any proof to back up many claims he's made regarding patents, contracts and rights.

I have never asked anything of Yigal except the truth. For me the dispute is over. If he feels it's necessary to make excuses to justify his use of my material, that it's not patented, that it's entered public domain (it hasn't), that it was published already (it was not). I'll let him do that.

I'm happy to see him do that because it reveals something very important. Someone who claims I gave him rights also feels the need to make excuses as to why he doesn't need my permission. It can't go both ways.

The problem started when Yigal decided to promote his reel using other people's effects and methods. He didn't sell a reel, he sold my hookup. And Einhorn's "Spooked". That's what he pitched, while keeping the actual product a secret.

But the most important thing I'd like people to realize is that I never accused Yigal of anything. I simply released my Master System demo and included a floating ring, using only my hookup. Yigal contacted me immediately claiming a patent pending on the floating ring effect (there is none you can look it up), and claiming our 1999 agreement applied to Tarantula. Of course it does not. And considering I never accused him of anything at this point he doth protest too much! He threatened me with legal action at which point I contacted my lawyer and over the course of a week and several letters put him in his place.

I hate being put in a position where I have to call someone a liar. I mean I REALLY hate it.

So I'll leave it at that.

Thanks for your time and consideration. And leave poor Mike alone he's a good guy

 

[OneCardWonder]

I just visited The Magic Cafe and read through all the Tarantula threads. My question is for you Michael, with all due respect. Why are you fighting Steve's battle? Why does Steve need a teenager coming to his aid? This makes no sense to me. Has he given you this mission to defend his name and honor? Let these two professionals handle this on their own. Let us make our own decision whether we want to purchase one product or the other.

This attitude really hacks me off. All you're doing is condoning the manifest theft of an idea. This trick was published when the publisher knew that the owner of the effect that the entire thing is based on is was disputing whether he could use it or not. The effect itself is about as inventive as adding a motor to a pair of scissors (patent refused, famous IP case and great analogy.) Bottom line is, the guy added an automatic spool to someone else's effect and is selling it for $70. That is NOT OK, and the consumers (us) absolutely cannot wash their hands of this issue by saying, "It's someone elses problem." What a complete jerk argument, I'm sorry. We the magic community have a responsibility to insure that this kind of thing does not happen. Not only is Tarantual a rip off in terms of price ($70 bucks for 0 value added to existing effects) you're saying that it's OK to behave this way in this community by buying it.

Steve Fearson doesn't need anyone to defend his reputation. His reputation speaks for itself. That doesn't stop people having an opinon here. This transends a dispute between 2 magicians and is something much more important and its a massive problem in modern magic. Classic effects being used by near enough no name magicians to make a name for themselves and hit the big time and get a bunch of stupid kids to buy it. Everyone on this forum has a right to speak on it whether you find it irritating or not. Maybe you were dropped as a child, or maybe you already bought Tarantula and want to feel all OK about it and believe you're not some sucker that's been duped like a snivelling mark, or you don't care that this stuff goes on in the magic community. Either way that makes you ignorant, and your ignorance offends me.

If that's how you roll good for you, but I've never heard anything so ridiculous in my life. This whole thing is -WORSE- than someone exposing a trick on YouTube imo. All of the analogies hold true. Some guy posts an expose of the clip shift and says, "Oh I thought I invented it." Does that make it OK? No, but at leasts he's not making money off of it. This is 10 times worse. It's knowingly publishing something that you know is going to offend the creator and then selling it for a ridiculous price to idiots who don't have a basic knowledge of electronics and are incapable of building a simple reel and motor on their own, lol. If you think that an electronic gimmick is worth 70 bucks then go right ahead and support this kind of ethical malpractice all you want. Personally I hope the magic community has more class than that.

Bill Palmer said it great over at the Cafe when he stated that Steve's method was found in an old German book from the 1970's, so he didn't reinvent the wheel. I think you should just drop this, because you're only coming off as irritating.

That is a steaming pile of untruth. This mystical german book, which is verifiably not what it was professed to be. What's irritating is a blase attitude from anyone in the community here regarding how absolutely ridiculous this is.

If you buy Tarantula, you are supporting this kind of crap in the magic community period. If that's acceptable to you, then fine, but there's nothing irritating about pointing out the -facts- of what happened. Go buy Fearson's publication. Support the artist.

As a prefice I don't know Steve Fearson beyond the fact that when I first saw his cigarette routine some years ago, I knew I was seeing something really special. To see that ripped off and packaged to idiots irritates the **** out of me, and so does your sensless leave it be attitude.

 

[jcherry]

I don't see where you read that I was condoning anything. I merely stated that coming in and only posting one side was ridiculous and to the "men" handle it themselves. As for this being a "massive problem in modern magic" I say read a history book. Magicians have been ripping each other off since the beginning. Does this make it ok now days? No. And I never said that it was. I never said I was on one side or the other in this matter. I did say that we should decide for ourselves and get to know both sides. Yigal stated that Steve's hook-up is used for one effect taught, but not for the rest and not for the ring flight that most have been drawn to the product for. How childish are you coming in half cocked and all full of piss and vinegar, calling people idiots and trying to belittle people. As matter of fact my leave it be attitude sounds about right for us seeing as Steve posted right before you that cases have been presented and we can decide for ourselves. It's Steve and Yigal's fight, let them hash it out.

 

[OneCardWonder]

I don't see where you read that I was condoning anything. I merely stated that coming in and only posting one side was ridiculous and to the "men" handle it themselves.

Evil is allowed to triumph because good men do nothing. That probably doesn't apply to you. You seem to believe that the right to comment, or indeed care about what this represents is limited to those directly involved, even though it clearly affects the entire community. It apparently 'irritates' you to see other people care, or involve themselves. That is condoning the behaviour by attempting to prevent protest against it. You can dress it up after the fact however you want.

was condoning anything. I merely stated that coming in and only posting one side was ridiculous and to the "men" handle it themselves. As for this being a "massive problem in modern magic" I say read a history book. Magicians have been ripping each other off since the beginning. Does this make it ok now days? No. And I never said that it was. I never said I was on one side or the other in this matter. I did say that we should decide for ourselves and get to know both sides.

Showing your total ignorance of the issue. It was a problem historically and its still a problem now yes, but that's completely irrelevant. You clearly haven't gotten to know both sides. Captain Tarantula is admittedly using a hook up, which according to the creator he does not have the right or permission to use. There is no argument. Even you acknowledge that in your very post. But lets let them sort it out? Lets not point out how absolutely unacceptable this is because it irritates you? Sorry buddy, but that's such huge levels of ignorance that its more offensive than anything I've said to you, and I don't need to belittle you when you just sit there repeating your morally bankrupt argument hoping it will fly if you just keep saying the same thing over and over again. Maybe that works for a 4 year old, but you'll get no such satisfaction from me.

alling people idiots and trying to belittle people. As matter of fact my leave it be attitude sounds about right for us seeing as Steve posted right before you that cases have been presented and we can decide for ourselves.

Wow your reading comprehension is way worse than I gave you credit for. You got all that from Steve's post? did you even read it? And for the record, I didn't call people idiots. I called you a morally bankrupt ****wit. Your point of view is that people shouldn't care that admitted use of someone's effect without their permission, or that should be resolved by them because it 'irritates you' that other people care. That is indirectly condoning it. Acting like people don't have a right to say something or giving anyone a hard time for 'irritating' you (which is exactly what you did) just makes you an idiot. Period. It may have earned you an apology from him, but it was an ******* point by you in the first place. I hope you have fun with tarantula, if you own it, but you're never going to morally justify that decision to anyone.

The only thing people have to make their minds up about it is if an electronic reel is worth 70 bucks. If they think it is, then that's up to them, as I said before, but morally this is just wrong in my opinion.


You're also continually asserting that there is some doubt as to whether or not this guy uses Fearson's hookup without permission. The hook up is used, and Fearson says he didn't give permission. There is no debate on that issue, and so people should do the right thing. Support the actual ARTIST. You're like global warming dissenter saying, "Now now, there's no real evidence so lets just make up our own minds about it." i.e. full of ****.

 

[NexusMagicShop]

You seem to be only informed from one side (Fearson's- which is biased by the way) so here's a link for you to see the other side. Or, if you will, the Rest of the Story (R.I.P. Paul Harvey)
http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=300146&forum=109&start=150

PAUL HARVEY DIED? That Sux! Good morning Americans, I'm Paul Harvey!

 

[Chr!s]

I've read many many statements from both sides of this argument, and now, thanks to Kras, seen the personal views of the two parties involved.
I think Mr Fearson should have been credited, for sure. The product's ARE different, a reel (especially what is apparently a very innovative one such as the Tarantula) can obviously perform a variety of effects that a regular hook up just can't, BUT when the gimmick is being combined with a hook-up already published, already in use by many top flight pro's, and the only PROOF we have of the integrity of Mesika is the fact that he assures us that he has permission, then something is obviously askew. It's not like a card effect being published where the double undercut is left absent-mindedly uncredited, it's quite a different kettle of fish.

I'm not taking sides, nor am I bashing Yigal. I love his work, and think he's a very talented thinker, manufacturer and performer. However, some clarity on his behalf would, I'm sure, clear a lot of this mess up.

Obviously just my opinion, garnered from my backseat view of things.

CL

 

[Michael Kras]

If anyone's interested, the MLS is now shipping. I'll be picking one up myself.

In case you missed it, check it out here: http://emagicsupply.com/112-masterlevitation-64-custom.html

 

[Deleted member 2755]

Never noticed this thread. I have no idea why it's in the product reviews section. I'll move it up to General Discussion.

Anyway, I've been keeping up with all this stuff, and after reading everything, I gotta say that it all just makes me want to pick up both. I won't say who's side I'm on with the issue as I don't know who's facts are true and who's aren't. I have my opinion, but I don't want to state on here who I think is telling the truth. Anyway, it appears the that Steve Fearson's hookup is amazing and a great innovation in the world of levitations. It also seems that the Tarantula uses Steve's hookup and enhances the things you can do with it. Overall, I may end up getting both at some point. I won't say who's I'm buying first because that would only show who's side I'm on. However, I think both are amazing. Whether or not Yigal has the rights to this hookup or not, I do not know. No one here actually knows.

Allow me to share something with you I read on the Cafe. Drama almost always occurs only happens with other people get involved with other people's business. This is between Yigal and Steve. As Steve said in his post, it is up to us to decide who is right in this situation. No need to make a private issue a public issue.

-Doug