In case you missed the point of the above skit, I was calling you self-righteous.
I am convinced that I am right so that does make me self-righteous. However, I'm willing to read what you have to say with an open mind and think about. However, you theatrics and hyperbole, while entertaining, make that difficult to do.
Oh, and sorry about you losing your holiday meal.
Okay everyone who performs or uses the double lift in any of their marketed effects must pay the creator of said move. If they are no longer living you must pay their oldest living blood.
I never said that. I actually said it was fine to use slights but not effects (this is complicated enough without getting into slights that are marketed as effects).
Great, but those where all hypothetical questions, Sheesh why are people taking a debate personally?
Actually, despite your best efforts to make this personal, I'm not taking it personally.
Not going to answer those questions, they are terribly loaded and are about to burst. Besides the point you are trying to convey is incredibly irrelevant. But I will tell you this, both equally have tier own pros and cons. One if you pay for the effects you are paying the creator that is a given, when you figure out an effect and choose to actually use it, chances are it’s a very good method. With that said word of mouth will get other to possibly purchase the effects. Now I have dwelled a little longer then I intended on those questions, moving on.
The reason you aren't answering that question is that you know that purchasing an effect, practicing it and then performing it shows more respect than merely reverse-engineering and performing it.
I'm glad you feel better thinking that your performance of effects that you reversed-engineered will entice others to do the right thing.
You just did and several others who yelled its stealing. Go back and reread.
Again, my posts drew a distinction between slights and effects.
Well Fudge and crackers, I have to go buy Daryls, ellusionists, and other’s dvds in order to perform the plot of an ACR. God damnit I am screwed now...
I've never said you can't perfom something like an ACR, Anniversary Waltz or Ace production without buying every source out there that addresses the effect. Any idea taken to the extreme can be made to seem absurd.
I think the better example is whether you think it is right to end your ACR with Dan Haas's Riot without paying Dan for creating that method / plot.
...this is something I wanted to bring up earlier but couldn’t figure out a good enough segue into it. When you buy an effect you are not buying the following:
Plot:
No plot of an effect is original to ANYONE! There are several plot lines that are the basis of every effect. I believe someone posted a thread a long while back titled “Theories of Magic” They listed things like this: Levitation, Transposition, Revelation, etc. Those are basic plots of magic. They are free game and can’t be bought or sold.
Patter:
Do I even need to say anything about this? I will regardless, most dvds don’t even come with real patter other then you ask the spectator to “Pick a card any card” that patter is someone else’s patter yet they don’t credit the person saying it. Another thing if you actually use that patter and you are not a beginner at magic, you need to be shot.
Now you probably asking yourself what’s left? DUR the method that someone took the darn time to make. That’s it your just paying for the secret nothing else, well maybe a dvd but dvd’s cost like 10 cents a disc.
I disagree. What you are buying is the APPLICATION of that secret to produce an effect.
You could know the pass, Biddle Count, DL, Mercury Card Fold and the back palm, but you haven't thought of how to put those secrets (or slights) together so a thought of card ends up in the spectator's underwear (just an example... I've never actually thought about that either). If someone came out with that effect it would be an application of those secrets (or in this case slights) to develop an effect.
So now by your logic we are Fed no matter what we do? Shizz then F ethics.
*Goes to demonoid and types in Magic*
*Rubs his head trying to rid his forehead, and don’t dignify yourself thinking you’re the one giving me it*
Get off the plot and patter crap, your slinging it around like a monkey. It is an over exaduration of the essence of what you are actually purchasing, a secret."
In case you missed it (and I'm sure you didn't), I'm saying it isn't wrong if you pay for the effect (regardless of whether you figured it out on your own), practice it and then perform it.
I apologize if I wasn't clear about what I meant by "plot." See above where I talk about the application of secrets to create an effect.
Sorry about the headache, but I feel better knowing that I didn't give it to you.
No one was denying that it isn’t ethically wrong.
I'm glad we can agree on something.
Dude if you reverse engineering an effect you are basically learning the secret, you can’t undo your thought. So you unethically according to you just learned the secret. Go kill yourself you unethical SOB. Anyway if you are really doing the reverse engineering as an exercise then you’d best harvest the fruit of your labor and use it to good effect for yourself.
If I go work out at the gym and build up all this muscle and get a nice beach body then go to my room and stay in all summer, what the hell did I just accomplish?
Again, I've never said there was a problem with reverse-engineering if you don't perform the effect. I think the benefit of reverse-engineering is it makes you a better magician. Thinking about how someone could do an effect is good training for developing your own effects (which if you do it well would be better than performing someone else's effects).
Your gym example is interesting. If you go to the gym and work to get a beach body, you most likely are doing that because you want to show it off on the beach. Does that mean that if you try to reverse-engineer an effect you are doing it because you like the effect but don't want to pay the creator for it?
If that is correct, then are you advocating that people try to reverse-engineer effects rather that pay for them?
Nice.
Huzzah!!!!!! *throws arms up in the air, letting it rain down the bloodied shoes of children past*
Your correct Ethics can’t be measured, with that said it makes everything you have been debating not what your doing is not debating its just flat out arguing the same damn points like a broken record.
I didn't say that ethics couldn't be measured, I said it should not be a comparative issue. That is, it shouldn't make a difference what other people are doing (e.g. youtube exposure, etc.) when deciding whether what you are doing is ethical.
Anyway, to say not having enough money is a rationalization is a very arrogant thing to say. What if I lived in India where it costs me three hundred dollars to ship a single 25 dollar dvd from the states to myself. Then after paying for all that find out the dvd is utter crap. Its called EMPATHY person.
I didn't mean it to be arrogant and I apologize if I came across that way.
My point here is that doing the right thing should apply to everyone regardless of how little or how much money they have, how old or how young they are, how experienced they are.
I do empathize with zynder. I gave him my best advice and told him to buy magic books. I'm not sure the counter advice (which you seem to advocate) to watch a preview video over and over again for 16 hours to figure out the method is really helpful either. And I know that neither you or I will advise him to search the net for tutorials or illegal downloads.
Wow I don’t even have to dicredit your theory that you are buying Plot, Patter, and Method. You just did it yourself, if I reverse engineer and create my own method to achieve the same plot, then use the same patter but a different method. According to you that is unethical. BS
If you are smart enough to come up with your own method, I would hope you are smart enough to come up with your own patter and presentation.
First of all Fearson did let Mr. Mesika use the hookup for the sunglasses, but that was it. He wasn’t given permission to use it for tarntula. But my reason for commenting now is to say your fickler then my cat.
Actually, Mr. Mesika purchased the rights to the hook-up or at least that's what he says in the Tarantula DVD (or at least that is what I recall).