Distortion Method Free

[TKH]

if they put a random name on it then dont u think laymen wont find it, any ways t11 wouldnt work as private. It survivews on the store, you need customers.

 

[Dave]

You guys don't get it. Legally, they do not have a leg to stand on unless someone has uploaded an actual portion of their published videos. If someone does their own performance and tutorial there is nothing that can be done about it....Period.


http://www.answers.com/topic/intellectual-rights-to-magic-methods

Copyright and patents

Copyright and patents, along with trade marks, are the main way that most legal systems explicitly provide for the creation of intellectual property rights and their protection.

Copyright does not automatically subsist in a magic trick per se, or any outcome achieved by way of such tricks. For example, according to United States copyright law:

In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.

The description of how a magic trick is performed may constitute a work of art that can be protected by way of copyright. However, exposing or revealing an explanation for how a magic trick is performed generally does not constitute an act of copyright infringement. A possible exception is where an exact copy of a description, including details of a particular magician's stage adaptations of the trick, is divulged.

In practical terms, if a magician writes a pamphlet which describes how a trick works, the pamphlet will generally be subject to copyright, but the trick itself will not be. The magician would have the same exclusive rights in the written pamphlet as an author has in a book, but the magician would not be able to prevent people from doing what was described in the pamphlet.

Another potential area of copyright protection for magic creators is through a choreography or pantomime copyright. Although this has yet to be tested in actual case law, a magic effect arguably meets the legal definitions for choreography and pantomime.[citation needed]

An invention or process which facilitates the performance of a magic trick is potentially patentable. However, applying for patent protection requires the public release of information about how the device or process works. Furthermore, when a patent is obtained, it can only be used to prevent a third party from making or using the subject matter of the patent, and could not be used to prevent anyone from revealing how the trick actually works.

 

[Dave]

http://www.answers.com/topic/intellectual-rights-to-magic-methods

Copyright and patents

Copyright and patents, along with trade marks, are the main way that most legal systems explicitly provide for the creation of intellectual property rights and their protection.
Copyright does not automatically subsist in a magic trick per se, or any outcome achieved by way of such tricks. For example, according to United States copyright law:

In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.[1]

The description of how a magic trick is performed may constitute a work of art that can be protected by way of copyright. However, exposing or revealing an explanation for how a magic trick is performed generally does not constitute an act of copyright infringement. A possible exception is where an exact copy of a description, including details of a particular magician's stage adaptations of the trick, is divulged.
In practical terms, if a magician writes a pamphlet which describes how a trick works, the pamphlet will generally be subject to copyright, but the trick itself will not be. The magician would have the same exclusive rights in the written pamphlet as an author has in a book, but the magician would not be able to prevent people from doing what was described in the pamphlet.
Another potential area of copyright protection for magic creators is through a choreography or pantomime copyright. Although this has yet to be tested in actual case law, a magic effect arguably meets the legal definitions for choreography and pantomime.[citation needed]
An invention or process which facilitates the performance of a magic trick is potentially patentable. However, applying for patent protection requires the public release of information about how the device or process works. Furthermore, when a patent is obtained, it can only be used to prevent a third party from making or using the subject matter of the patent, and could not be used to prevent anyone from revealing how the trick actually works.

http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/unprotected.html

An example is the best way to explain this idea/expression distinction. Suppose that an inventor discovers a process for cold fusion--an invention that would revolutionize society as we know it. If the inventor were to write down on paper a description of the process, that description would be protected against copyright infringement from the moment the work is fixed. If she were to publish her paper, no one would be able to make additional copies of the paper without her permission. However, anyone reading her paper could implement her process without fear of copyright infringement, since the process itself--the idea--is not protected under copyright law. In fact, it would even be allowable for someone to write a competing paper describing her invention, as long as the competing paper described the invention in its own words and did not take any "expression" from the original paper. However, only the inventor could apply for patent protection for her process. After applying for the patent, and going through a rigorous examination of the patentability of her patent, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office might grant her a patent. At that point, she could prevent all others from using her idea. (For more discussion on patent protection, see the BitLaw discussion on patents).

 

[y2john]

Yeah im afraid not much can really be done other than for places like youtube to delete the content themselves, but even that takes time and so the content would be viewable for a while.
They are not really doing anything officially ilegal as no actual content is posted from the actual products.
I wish there was a way but it's all down to the individuals, many of whom obviously don't respect this art and those involved in it.
Maybe there could be a way to ensure that those who enter this site and others are involved in magic because they love and enjoy it and want to be a part of it... but im not really sure how as things like having to answer questions etc are too easy to get around.
It seems like exposure etc is something we're gonna have to put up with.

 

[clllllust]

Well what I hate about it is that people are getting away with it. I haven't seen anyone fined for uploading ACTUAL dvd's on P*****e or M********d and yet nothing is being done. Even mentioning the links to magic sites who sell it can't do anything. Even after the FBI warnings at the beginning of the DVD's saying theyd get a fine of 250 grand. The kids on youtube who reveal make me angry because they're horrible at magic but, they have a right to free speech. It's just the people who pirate stuff that makes me want to do something to stop it.

-RA69

 

[Jupiter]

Okay,

So what if someone stumbles across a tutorial for Two Card Monte on Youtube, and they are like "Woah, that was really cool" and they practice it a bit to get it allright and they go show their Mum, and their Mumbo is like Wow I really liked that Jimmy, and now Jimmy has been bitten by the magic bug.

Now Jimmy will either stop being a douche and learning from exposure videos and join an awesome forum with good morals, Theory, Penguin or E will do just fine, and then they learn the way of the magician and become a devotee to the art we all love so much.

Or Jimmy will be a douche and keep going to exposure sites.

IF Jimmy is to take the top route, then great, how are we to know that we are not dealing with the next Tommy Wonder or Lance Burton.

Exposure can't be stopped. It's a fact. It could perhaps be slightly limited, but that's as far as it could go I feel and if Jimmy is going to grow up and be a superstar. Then exposure isn't as bad as we make it out to be.