The Morals of "Figuring Out"

[RealityOne]

Why shouldn't you perform it if you figure it out. Tricks and magic wouldn't evolve if people couldn't see past the illusions every once in a while and maybe even preform them. If everyone who could figure something out and they still did not preform it then eventually there would only be a few people who could even create magic without having somehow taken someone else's idea. Just preforming doesn't do any harm. However, if you said that you were the one creating the trick then there would be a problem.

It is absurd to argue that magic only progresses through figuring out someone else's creations and then performing that effect. Think about what you are saying... figuring out the effects that other people have created and then perform them will help you create effects in the future? If you already knew the slights necessary to perform the effect, why didn't you come up with the effect yourself? I suspect the reason is because you lacked the time, creativity and/or experience to come up with the plot and the patter.

I'm not saying you shouldn't use slights that others have developed. Most of what we know is built on the slights developed in the early 1900 and perfected / explained by Grant, Vernon, Annerman, Hugard, Braue, Erdnase, Scarne, Buckley, Hull, etc. However, if someone has taken the time to test, perfect, produce and distribute an effect (slights, plot and presentation) then it is the right thing to do to buy that effect before performing it.

Crediting an effect is an altogether different issue. A performer does not need to credit an effect (which they have paid for and have the rights to perform). In fact, that is absurd... "I'm going to be performing an Ace assembly originally developed by Vernon followed by a Card to Mouth routine by Dan and Dave with a twist at the end using a Mercury Card Fold developed by Hugard and Braue." Naming the effects you are doing only encourages people to use Google to try and figure out how the effect works. Full and complete crediting is only required if you are selling your effect.

What would happen if everyone figured out every effect that has a preview video? I think the result would be that nobody would produce any more effects for sale. We can all agree that is a bad result. If it is a bad idea for everyone to do that, what makes it a good idea for a single individual to do it?

Sherlock is right in that "the high road is more difficult, and the path less taken." But just because something is difficult it doesn't mean we shouldn't do it.

A final word of advice... If you deconstruct and then perform effects without paying for them, don't mention it at your local IBM or SAM meeting. You will lose your credibility with every magician in the room.

 

[KeoSilver]

Merry Christmas HO HO HO! I take one you get the other two

It is absurd to argue that magic only progresses through figuring out someone else's creations and then performing that effect. Think about what you are saying... figuring out the effects that other people have created and then perform them will help you create effects in the future? If you already knew the slights necessary to perform the effect, why didn't you come up with the effect yourself? I suspect the reason is because you lacked the time, creativity and/or experience to come up with the plot and the patter.

Its not absurd to argue that figuring out someones effect will progress magic, what is absurd is completely dismissing the idea. Blah blah blah I blame you for laziness. That isn't true and quite insulting to magicians who do reverse engineer, which I know is every single one of ya. Who hasn't watched a new sankey clip and compared what you were seeing to that of his later work, that in itself is a form of reverse engineering.

I'm not saying you shouldn't use slights that others have developed. Most of what we know is built on the slights developed in the early 1900 and perfected / explained by Grant, Vernon, Annerman, Hugard, Braue, Erdnase, Scarne, Buckley, Hull, etc. However, if someone has taken the time to test, perfect, produce and distribute an effect (slights, plot and presentation) then it is the right thing to do to buy that effect before performing it.

First off its Annemann if you are going to speak heavily on crediting get the person's name right!
This is completely your opinion it isn't illegal to reverse engineer. My question is what if this sleight, plot, presentation is not to the performers needs and he never buys nor use the effect. That performer would never purchase it nor would they ever perform it, has something been stolen and made morally wrong? Another thing if people are putting effects out on the market just to make a quick buck, that is their fault.
Once you put an effect on the market, its free game. If you perform an effect of a marketed trick, who is to say you reverse engineered it?

What would happen if everyone figured out every effect that has a preview video? I think the result would be that nobody would produce any more effects for sale. We can all agree that is a bad result. If it is a bad idea for everyone to do that, what makes it a good idea for a single individual to do it?

Why would that be a bad thing? You just stated earlier that reverse engineered magic does not help move magic forward. A method is a method my friend, whether you buy it or stumble upon it yourself. My point, if reverse engineering or buying a method do not move magic forward, and creators not releasing material is also a bad thing. Is there anything good about your hypothesis?

Sherlock is right in that "the high road is more difficult, and the path less taken." But just because something is difficult it doesn't mean we shouldn't do it.

A final word of advice... If you deconstruct and then perform effects without paying for them, don't mention it at your local IBM or SAM meeting. You will lose your credibility with every magician in the room.

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHHHAHAHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IBM and SAM are where I learn much of my effects that I did not legally own. Ever heard of a mentor?

Anyway its terrible that you would slink to a scare tactic to get your point across.

Bottom line this debate is not black and white like your opinionated post makes it out to be. It's not/or is morally or ethically wrong to reverse engineer an effect, Morals and ethics are valued by the singular person. What they interpret is up to them.

 

[Morgan B]

And to all a good night!

 

[William Draven]

And to everyone else a good morning as well!

 

[William Draven]

Here's an interesting thought so long as we are discussing the stealing of material.

If you perform an effect, such as say "Pressure", by figuring it out instead of buying the DVD, then am I correct that you are saying that is stealing?

Now, call me crazy, but I find it hard to apply that deffenition uniformly to every situation across the board.

To use my example of pressure again, it's a fairly simple effect. To believe that Garcia (I think it was Garcia) was the only person to come up with that idea is silly. I'm sure there are more people that have the same concepts. Garcia was just the first to publish it. Does that mean that they are guilty of stealing?

To give a real world example. Yale Gracey the Disney Imagineer responsible for designing the Peppers Ghost illusion in the Haunted Mansion created the concept independantly without even knowing of it's existance almost a 100 years prior. Does that mean that Yale stole the idea? No. Great minds think alike.

To a lesser point, unless you invite soeone over to your house to personally examine your library, and all the reciepts that you've ever purchased of magic, then it's hard to tell who has had or currently has what in their libraries. My point is getting all fired up over a ethical point is a bit silly when in the real world, exposure of someone who steals is neigh impossible. This situation will default to a personal level where it is up to the individual magi's sense of moral responsibility to guide them down the "correct" path. If they deviate, really who is going to be able to judge?

 

[RealityOne]

Its not absurd to argue that figuring out someones effect will progress magic, what is absurd is completely dismissing the idea. Blah blah blah I blame you for laziness. That isn't true and quite insulting to magicians who do reverse engineer, which I know is every single one of ya. Who hasn't watched a new sankey clip and compared what you were seeing to that of his later work, that in itself is a form of reverse engineering.

The issue is not reverse engineering an effect. I agree that reverse engineering an effect is an excellent exercise in creative thinking. My issue is with a magician performing an effect that they have reverse engineered without paying the creator.

First off its Annemann if you are going to speak heavily on crediting get the person's name right!

My mistake there... maybe my keyboard is Jinxed.

This is completely your opinion it isn't illegal to reverse engineer. My question is what if this sleight, plot, presentation is not to the performers needs and he never buys nor use the effect. That performer would never purchase it nor would they ever perform it, has something been stolen and made morally wrong?

I never said it was illegal to reverse engineer an effect. In fact it is not illegal to perform an effect you reversed engineered.

I also never said it was unethical to reverse engineer an effect that you do not perform.

What I did say is that it is unethical to perform an effect that you have reversed engineered. With that in mind, nothing you say in the above quote contradicts anything I've said.

Another thing if people are putting effects out on the market just to make a quick buck, that is their fault.

That is another issue altogether. I agree here are a lot of one-trick wonders out there that are quickly produced merely to make a buck. However, just because someone puts a effect out there to make a buck, doesn't make it acceptable to reverse engineer and perform it.

Once you put an effect on the market, its free game. If you perform an effect of a marketed trick, who is to say you reverse engineered it?

That logic could be applied to a performance too. Do you really believe that once someone performs an effect, it is free game to reverse engineer and perform it? As for who would know, only you. That is why ethics are often described as how you act when no one is looking.

Why would that be a bad thing? You just stated earlier that reverse engineered magic does not help move magic forward. A method is a method my friend, whether you buy it or stumble upon it yourself. My point, if reverse engineering or buying a method do not move magic forward, and creators not releasing material is also a bad thing. Is there anything good about your hypothesis?

Magic is moved forward by magicians who take what they know and then innovate to create more amazing effects. If people are merely reverse engineering effects, they are not creating they are imitating. I agree with you that buying the DVD and performing the routine as it is presented on the DVD doesn't move magic forward either.

That being said, I still think it would be a bad thing is creators stopped producing magic for sale. Some of my most powerful effects are from DVDs that I've purchased (e.g. Tagged by Rich Ferguson and Refraction by David Penn).

Now, I realize that isn't a actual possibility, but nonetheless, I'm willing to pay for effects (including slights which I may already know, plots and presentation) that I perform to assure that creators keep making their creations available.

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHHHAHAHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IBM and SAM are where I learn much of my effects that I did not legally own. Ever heard of a mentor?

Anyway its terrible that you would slink to a scare tactic to get your point across. .

I glad I could make you laugh.

For the record, my comment wasn't meant as a scare tactic, but an opinion based on my experiences.

And, believe it or not, I actually have heard of a mentor. Generally, mentors show you slights and methods that are common knowledge (double lift, glide, pass, palm, etc.) and may show you how to do effects they have created.

If your IBM/SAM group has people showing you how to do Dan and Dave's Tivo 2.0 or Daniel Garcia's Fraud, I would be surprised.

It is interesting that you use the term "effects that I did not legally own." Doesn't that acknowledge my point?

Bottom line this debate is not black and white like your opinionated post makes it out to be. It's not/or is morally or ethically wrong to reverse engineer an effect, Morals and ethics are valued by the singular person. What they interpret is up to them.

You are right. I do see this as black and white. If you perform an effect that was created by someone else, you should obtain permission (which for most effects is accomplished through purchasing the effect). That is the right thing to do.

Finally, saying morals and ethics are up to the individual person is merely saying you can do whatever you want to if you feel like it. Take the high road... if an effect is good enough for you to perform, pay the creator.

 

[RealityOne]

Here's an interesting thought so long as we are discussing the stealing of material.

If you perform an effect, such as say "Pressure", by figuring it out instead of buying the DVD, then am I correct that you are saying that is stealing?

Now, call me crazy, but I find it hard to apply that deffenition uniformly to every situation across the board.

To use my example of pressure again, it's a fairly simple effect. To believe that Garcia (I think it was Garcia) was the only person to come up with that idea is silly. I'm sure there are more people that have the same concepts. Garcia was just the first to publish it. Does that mean that they are guilty of stealing?

To give a real world example. Yale Gracey the Disney Imagineer responsible for designing the Peppers Ghost illusion in the Haunted Mansion created the concept independantly without even knowing of it's existance almost a 100 years prior. Does that mean that Yale stole the idea? No. Great minds think alike.

To a lesser point, unless you invite soeone over to your house to personally examine your library, and all the reciepts that you've ever purchased of magic, then it's hard to tell who has had or currently has what in their libraries. My point is getting all fired up over a ethical point is a bit silly when in the real world, exposure of someone who steals is neigh impossible. This situation will default to a personal level where it is up to the individual magi's sense of moral responsibility to guide them down the "correct" path. If they deviate, really who is going to be able to judge?

As for your Pressure example, I've never used the word stealing (which I view as a legal term). I'm just arguing that it is unethical to purposefully watch a trailier 100 times and try to figure out a method and then to perform that effect without paying the creator. Once you get beyond that type of example, it does become more of a grey area.

If someone has come up with the same handling of a balloon as in Pressure before Garcia, I have no problem with them performing their effect. That is, I agree with what you are saying regarding independent creation. I have slights that I use that are my own creation, but I've never done the research to see if it is duplicative of someone else's method.

I also agree there is no way to "enforce" ethics. However, I think posting in threads like this give magicians something to think about. If they choose to "deviate" from (what I think is) the "correct" path, at least they have done so knowingly.

 

[Mr. Jane]

This morale grey area that people are talking about doesn't really exist. Unless you call the grey area, that of contradiction and slight hypocrisy then yes it truly does.

Figuring out something isn't of course bad, how we use it seems to be bring up some very different responses in people. Do I believe that using some effect you figured out legitimately is morally wrong, maybe just a bit. However, think about this with every single other product out there, not magic but just in general.

If you figured out how to make a iPhone that actually works on the network and you of course pay for the celluar use is that the same? You figured it out fair and square and don't plan on making money on your bootleg version.

If you figure out something fair and square then what's the problem with using it? Respect to the creator and all this mumbo jumbo, these morales that people seem to be so high and mighty of. If you use this material to make money then you are of course in the wrong, of course there is no set law against this specific incident but this I do find morally wrong.

Isn't the job to entertain people, but only once the guy makes his cut. Sounds kind of bad imo, but again it's just another opinion.

 

[KeoSilver]

The issue is not reverse engineering an effect. I agree that reverse engineering an effect is an excellent exercise in creative thinking. My issue is with a magician performing an effect that they have reverse engineered without paying the creator.
That is fair.


My mistake there... maybe my keyboard is Jinxed.

Oh Nos I got a remedy for that, have to find a unicorn though before I can help you.


That is another issue altogether. I agree here are a lot of one-trick wonders out there that are quickly produced merely to make a buck. However, just because someone puts a effect out there to make a buck, doesn't make it acceptable to reverse engineer and perform it.

I agree somewhat, but who is to say that they did not oh I don't know "stumble on the same method" for an effect.



That logic could be applied to a performance too. Do you really believe that once someone performs an effect, it is free game to reverse engineer and perform it? As for who would know, only you. That is why ethics are often described as how you act when no one is looking.

No I do not think its a right to perform an effect that you have seen from a performance video. Also its integrity not ethics, something them drill srgt. beat into my brain.

Anyway, I believe the topic is talking about marketed effects. If you reverse engineer an effect that isn't on the mass market I would say yeah your ripping someone off.



Magic is moved forward by magicians who take what they know and then innovate to create more amazing effects. If people are merely reverse engineering effects, they are not creating they are imitating. I agree with you that buying the DVD and performing the routine as it is presented on the DVD doesn't move magic forward either.

" If people are merely reverse engineering effects, they are not creating they are imitating." This is only the immediate effect of reverse engineering. In order to take the step to push magic forward more, its up to the person who reversed engineered to use the method learned and apply it to something original.



If your IBM/SAM group has people showing you how to do Dan and Dave's Tivo 2.0 or Daniel Garcia's Fraud, I would be surprised.

It is interesting that you use the term "effects that I did not legally own." Doesn't that acknowledge my point?

*chuckles again* If I see most of the older guys doing a DD trick I may laugh out Loud. What point? that learning a method through a video or maybe even word of mouth, then performing it as your own is unethical? I don't think it does...


You are right. I do see this as black and white. If you perform an effect that was created by someone else, you should obtain permission (which for most effects is accomplished through purchasing the effect). That is the right thing to do.

Finally, saying morals and ethics are up to the individual person is merely saying you can do whatever you want to if you feel like it. Take the high road... if an effect is good enough for you to perform, pay the creator.

Well you can do what you want, I can decide to replicate "Black Christmas" if I really wanted to. Some people's ethics and morals would be completely fine.

I read early on that when you purchase an effect your purchasing the performance rights unless otherwise stated. If that is so who is to say that joe schmo pirate performing pressure has any less right then goody good performing pressure? What if Joe Schmo Pirate actually bought pressure then sold it, and Goody good reverse engineered it? What would you do, what can you do? If anything rides on a code of ethics its going to be grey period. Human nature just makes it that way. It may be black and white to one individual but in reality the big picture its a huge grey pencil smudge on my draft. You can kind of tell where the lines were, and you can kind of tell were the white was.

I am not agreeing or really disagreeing just pointing out that this isn't B&W.

 

[canadamagic]

I havn't read the entire thread so forgive me, though I have a point that has been in my head since this thread was started.

If we are saying that doing a move or effect that others have created is wrong or illegal, than how are magicians to learn. All moves, things maybe as small as a DL, or a charlié, the basics would be wrong to perform as we don't have "rights" to them. I think that it is down to the person to have their own choice on wheather using an effect we have figured out is right or wrong or not.

 

[drop]

I really think it depends on what exactly you are doing.

If you are taking an idea, then I really see no problem in it. For example, borrowing a clever reveal to a forced card is fine. You aren't stealing the force, but only the idea.

If it is something more "stand alone", such as pressure, lit, etc. then it would be wrong to borrow without paying.

Not really up for me to decide for anyone else though, and of course there is no legal restriction.

 

[zynder]

I was reading about 6 pages and I grew tired of reading some.

For me, If i figure out a trick from a trailer, i think there's nothing wrong with doing it. As a magician, how can you resist not doing some tricks if you have an idea behind it? You did not steal anything because it doesn't involve money yet.

As long as you perform it excellent and does not involve any selling of the effect, then there's no case. Just give the credit to where it's due.

 

[adjones]

I was reading about 6 pages and I grew tired of reading some.

For me, If i figure out a trick from a trailer, i think there's nothing wrong with doing it. As a magician, how can you resist not doing some tricks if you have an idea behind it? You did not steal anything because it doesn't involve money yet.

As long as you perform it excellent and does not involve any selling of the effect, then there's no case. Just give the credit to where it's due.

Really? So those magicians that sell magic for a LIVING (i.e. that's how they feed their families), don't deserve the money from you for the trick THEY created? That is incredibly arrogant and one of the most immature things I've ever heard. Even if I figure an effect out, I still purchase it. 1) It shows respect towards the artist. 2) Often times apart from the effect, the creator teaches you other things to go along with it, advanced handlings, different setups, tips, etc. It's always worth it.

Stop thinking of yourself so much...

 

[wZEnigma]

Really? So those magicians that sell magic for a LIVING (i.e. that's how they feed their families), don't deserve the money from you for the trick THEY created? That is incredibly arrogant and one of the most immature things I've ever heard. Even if I figure an effect out, I still purchase it. 1) It shows respect towards the artist. 2) Often times apart from the effect, the creator teaches you other things to go along with it, advanced handlings, different setups, tips, etc. It's always worth it.

Stop thinking of yourself so much...

The best post so far in this thread.

Ian

 

[KeoSilver]

Orly Ian, I thought the best post so far was your own.

Really? So those magicians that sell magic for a LIVING (i.e. that's how they feed their families), don't deserve the money from you for the trick THEY created? That is incredibly arrogant and one of the most immature things I've ever heard. Even if I figure an effect out, I still purchase it. 1) It shows respect towards the artist. 2) Often times apart from the effect, the creator teaches you other things to go along with it, advanced handlings, different setups, tips, etc. It's always worth it.

Stop thinking of yourself so much...

I guess you are trying to be noble but I have to nit pick a little.

"So those magicians that sell magic for a LIVING (i.e. that's how they feed their families), don't deserve the money from you for the trick THEY created?"

Where did he say that directly? Another thing, the only people I know about that sell magic for a living are the ones who run online magic shops and brick an mortar shops.

Now your argument is: " So those magicians that sell magic for a LIVING (i.e. that's how they feed their families), don't deserve the money from you for the trick THEY created?"

Now I have to assume your not talking about brick and mortar magicians, but speaking about magic performers who have decided to sell an effect. I find your example (if its real) incredibly irresponsible of the magician. If the magicians is relying only on effects created, then sold on the market for a reliable income to feed their family is ludicrous.

You'd have to have some other supplementary job: gigs, a normal job, contract jobs, etc.

It isn't quite arrogant nor an immature thing for someone to express their feelings and opinions on an open matter, plus I have heard more immature things before some from yourself and myself.

Now I am going to address another thing that you stated.

"Even if I figure an effect out, I still purchase it. 1) It shows respect towards the artist."

Oh really? The people who go and purchase an effect then copy and pirate it, or go on youtube and expose it is a way to show respect toward the creator? One would question if they even had respect for the creator to begin with. What about the people who purchase the effect, practice it for a day or two and then shove onto youtube?

The real way that I see to show respect toward an artist/creator is t practice the effect until it is down solid and then proceed to perform the effect well.


Anyway Happy Holidays,

Silver

 

[wZEnigma]

Good points Keoke.

And I meant the best reply. Thanks.

Ian

 

[RealityOne]

For me, If i figure out a trick from a trailer, i think there's nothing wrong with doing it. As a magician, how can you resist not doing some tricks if you have an idea behind it? You did not steal anything because it doesn't involve money yet.

As long as you perform it excellent and does not involve any selling of the effect, then there's no case. Just give the credit to where it's due.

There is money involved. The person who created the effect is selling the explantation, routining and the performance rights. By performing an effect you didn't buy you are taking his or her idea, concept and/or plot without paying for it. The creator expects to be paid for the effect. Otherwise they wouldn't be selling it.

As for how you can resist it? It is called doing the right thing and behaving ethically.

And how do you "give credit where it's due" to an effect? "This effect is called Pressure and it was developed by Daniel Garcia and Dan White... Its for sale on various magic websites, but I didn't pay for it. I watched the preview video fifty times until I think I figured out how it was done..."

 

[RealityOne]

I guess you are trying to be noble but I have to nit pick a little.

"So those magicians that sell magic for a LIVING (i.e. that's how they feed their families), don't deserve the money from you for the trick THEY created?"

Where did he say that directly? Another thing, the only people I know about that sell magic for a living are the ones who run online magic shops and brick an mortar shops.

Now your argument is: " So those magicians that sell magic for a LIVING (i.e. that's how they feed their families), don't deserve the money from you for the trick THEY created?"

Now I have to assume your not talking about brick and mortar magicians, but speaking about magic performers who have decided to sell an effect. I find your example (if its real) incredibly irresponsible of the magician. If the magicians is relying only on effects created, then sold on the market for a reliable income to feed their family is ludicrous.

You'd have to have some other supplementary job: gigs, a normal job, contract jobs, etc.

It isn't quite arrogant nor an immature thing for someone to express their feelings and opinions on an open matter, plus I have heard more immature things before some from yourself and myself.

OK, so creating and selling effects isn't and shouldn't be their only source of income. Notwithstanding you nit picking, adjones has a valid point.

Do you think that magicians who generate a portion of their income from selling effects they create should be compensated when someone performs their effect using the same method and plot?

My answer to that question is yes, even if the person performing the effect figured out the method by watching a preview.

Now I am going to address another thing that you stated.

"Even if I figure an effect out, I still purchase it. 1) It shows respect toward the artist."

Oh really? The people who go and purchase an effect then copy and pirate it, or go on youtube and expose it is a way to show respect toward the creator? One would question if they even had respect for the creator to begin with. What about the people who purchase the effect, practice it for a day or two and then shove onto youtube?

The real way that I see to show respect toward an artist/creator is t practice the effect until it is down solid and then proceed to perform the effect well.

I agree that NONE of the follow show respect for a creator of an effect:

1. Copying or pirating a DVD or book
2. Intentionally exposing an effect on Youtube
3. Unintentionally exposing an effect on Youtube based on a poor performance

My question to you is which of the following options shows MORE respect for a creator of an effect:

1. PAYING for the effect and then practicing an effect until it is down solid and performing the effect well (hopefully by adapting the patter to your own style and non mimicking the creator).

2. NOT PAYING for the effect and then practicing an effect until it is down solid and performing the effect well (hopefully by adapting the patter to your own style and non mimicking the creator).

 

[RealityOne]

I haven't read the entire thread so forgive me, though I have a point that has been in my head since this thread was started.

If we are saying that doing a move or effect that others have created is wrong or illegal, than how are magicians to learn. All moves, things maybe as small as a DL, or a charlié, the basics would be wrong to perform as we don't have "rights" to them. I think that it is down to the person to have their own choice on whether using an effect we have figured out is right or wrong or not.

I don't think anyone is saying that you must purchase the rights to every slight that you know. I think the question relates to when you use your knowledge of slights to reverse engineer an effect and then perform that effect.

I have no problem with someone teaching various slights with proper crediting. Most card DVDs will provide a history or source for the various slights taught as part of effects. For example, take a look at Richard Kaufman's On the Pass DVD which credits each version of the pass to the creator or original source.

What I have a problem with is someone who see a preview for an effect, reverse engineers the effect and then performs it. For example, anyone who is familiar with various versions of the Anniversary Waltz and gaffed cards could figure out how to do Justin Miller's Autograph. However, what they have figured out is just the method (which slights to do in which order). Justin came up with the plot of the effect and the presentation shown in the preview video. My point is that even if you figure out the method, you shouldn't perform the effect (including the method, plot or patter) unless you buy the DVD.

 

[Morgan B]

So let me ask you this guys?

What is the difference between seeing an effect and figuring it out - and one of your magic buddies teaching/telling you the method of an effect he bought? I am sure when someone tells you an effect, you don't go out and buy the DVD or book all the time?

I am seeing some serious hypocrisy on this one.

I think all of us realize that burning a DVD for free, or a PDF of a book is something that should be considered ethically wrong. The question is, do we draw a line in the sand, and at what point?

1. Is a friend showing you the method to a trick that isn't his wrong?
2. If I see a video on youtube, or a trailer, and figure out the method via my brain, and then do it, is that wrong?

This isn't about stealing presentation, we are talking how we learn - so, if we learn something for free and we didn't create it - is someone owed money?

Personally, I don't believe so.

Those who I have learnt their effects for free - they have recieved my business in other effects or ways. Also, I have had people ask about effects, and sent them to the creator. We ALL SHARE IDEAS THAT AREN'T ORIGINAL TO US ON THIS VERY FORUM. How many times have people quoted books or words, are we all to send money to the writer? Come on.

Let me propose this - what if you bought a book with an effect in it that the author decided to put in a free PDF to increase sales and give people a free download/look at his work? Can I get money back for that section of the book I paid for? If they give it out for free, a free download, is it now theft if I learn and do it? HELL NO!

So, why would it be consider stealing in any other way?

In the end - do what you feel is right. However, I find it hilarious that so many of you think that seeing an effect and figuring it out is stealing! Yet, put sloppy videos on Youtube, download free magic via share programs, and ask so many questions on how things are done on this forum!

Realize the battle you are fighting is against yourselves! Shake your head.

Enjoy boxing day...a perfect day for those that think inside it.