Teller on theft in magic

http://www.esquire.com/features/teller-honor-system-1012

by robmil • 14 years ago

156 77 14 years ago

robmil5• 14 years ago

Especially interesting when viewed in the context of recent patent disputes in the tech world. To hear Teller talk and to hear his performances described conveys that ethereal, intangible quality that "the real thing" has and that knockoffs generally fail to capture — a quality that seems instinctively to be deserving of protection.

ajross• 14 years ago

If the "knockoffs" can't capture it, why does it need protection? The logic doesn't work there. You could just as easily defend the cynical interpretation that Teller is looking to "defend" (via the monopoly status of his tricks) his quite substantial revenue stream. That doesn't seem so deserving of protection to me.

DigitalJack• 14 years ago

My take on the article was that the fight is against taking something beautiful and magical and making it pedestrian through unartful performance.

robmil5• 14 years ago

The argument (which I'm by no means seeking to make) would presumably be that knockoffs don't necessarily have to capture the same spirit as the original in order to devalue the original — and, indeed, the very fact that they don't capture the spirit of the original is what makes their devaluing influence most powerful.

AndyNemmity13• 14 years ago

Gerard Bakardy reuploaded his version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkq4XfFgCYs

The style couldn't be more different. The "effect" is the same, but the style is light years apart.

I don't believe you should be able to copyright an effect, and it's likely he's not even using the same effect.

I understand Teller wants to protect an idea he came up with, but I think it's protected simply by the grace and beauty of his version.

robmil5• 14 years ago

That's the big question, with a universal application: that tension between the fact that knockoffs have a diluting effect on the original, and the idea that if your idea can so readily be copied it's perhaps not worthy of protection.

grandalf3• 14 years ago

The magician's creed is a lot like an open source license with the restriction of attribution. If attribution is given then copying is considered respectable, whereas if it's not then it's considered theft.

danielweber• 14 years ago

I understand Teller wants to protect an idea he came up with

Given how much Penn & Teller built their careers on exposing the tricks of other magicians who had guarded their secrets for decades (and getting a lot of stage magicians made at the duo), it's pretty ironic for Teller to now decide he wants government protection for a trick of his.

Disclaimer: esquire.com is not working for me right now so I haven't read the original article yet; I'm basing this on your comment.

AndyNemmity13• 14 years ago

I don't agree with you that Penn and Teller built their careers on exposing tricks of other magicians.

They do a couple exposures. Cups and Balls, Blast off, and a new escape in their act that you can choose to cover your eyes for or not.

Cups and Balls and Blast Off aren't exactly carefully guarded secrets... what are you referring to?

Retric• 14 years ago

I never got the impression that most magicians cared that much for the actual trick. It's a performance art and some of there 'show the magic trick behind clear plastic' is just as interesting as the actual 'trick'. So, I don't know if this is really about protecting tricks as much as preventing bad imitations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_n3Zb3bW3g

aprescott• 14 years ago

(When Penn & Teller have famously exposed a trick, they've almost always invented a ridiculously poetic method and built the trick around it; by making their art seem more intricate than it is, they force the audience to assume that the rest of their tricks are equally complex. Penn & Teller's exposures are really part of an elaborate con.)

— The article.

ubernostrum• 14 years ago

I don't know about that.

The Cups and Balls is a classic, and everybody knows, or can easily find out, how it's done. And then they take it and turn that on its head, by doing a routine around "we're going to show you exactly how the trick works, and still amaze you with it". Which is, well, magic.

And in general, a lot of their "exposures" follow that patten. They're much more about artistry and that kind of next-level thing where showing the "secret" doesn't detract from but in fact adds to the effect.

Stubbs• 14 years ago

As other people have mentioned Penn & Teller don't have a problem with people copying their ideas & improving them or performing them in a different way.

The problem here is that the chap was then SELLING the trick for thousands of dollars, that's where Teller started to have a problem with it.

ajanuary3• 14 years ago

Judging by the description of the video in the article, this isn't the same video.

AndyNemmity13• 14 years ago

It isn't the same video, it's the same trick. He has uploaded a new version of the same trick in an attempt to get past the removal that Teller did of the previous video.

ZoFreX2• 14 years ago

Did you read the article? That is not the same video or trick that Teller is suing over.

Article version:

> Against a crimson curtain, Bakardy had erected an easel with what looked like a large pad of white paper on it. Perhaps six feet in front of the easel sat a small wood table bearing a glass Coke bottle filled with water. That bottle also contained a single rose. A spotlight, outside of the camera's view, cast the rose's shadow on the paper on the easel. Dressed in a dark suit, Bakardy appeared in the frame carrying a large knife in his right hand. He sliced it deep into the rose's shadow. And when he cut into its shadow, something impossible happened: The corresponding part of the rose fell off the stem and onto the table. Petal by petal, Bakardy cut at the rose's shadow until that Coke bottle somehow held only a decapitated stem, which he removed as though to demonstrate the absence of wires. He then lifted up the bottle itself — still no strings attached — and poured out the water. Ta-da.

AndyNemmity13• 14 years ago

I read the article. I have followed the case when it was initially brought by Teller, and have read the legal documents he put forth.

It is not the same video, it is the same trick done with different patter, and feel. Sorry if that is not clear, I can tell by the reading the intention I was trying to convey was not the intention people got.

He reuploaded him doing the trick with different patter, not the same video.

thesash2• 14 years ago

What's true for magic is true for tech: "Invention is all fuzzy, sloppy stuff"

AndyNemmity13• 14 years ago

It would be funny if copyright in tech was treated like it was in magic.

All of the techie people instead of deriding copyright would instead insult and attack anyone who used any code remotely similar making sure to not stay in the same company of someone who would dare write even a version of a sorting function.

thesash2• 14 years ago

I think the analogue would be design, as opposed to code, see Apple v. Samsung case

udpheaders• 14 years ago

Ringling Bros and Barnum & Bailey Clown College

It was worth the read just for that alone.

robmil5• 14 years ago

There's also an interesting parallel with standup comedy. At least here in the UK, the stealing of jokes by mainstream comedians from alternative performers is — while not accepted — viewed by the victims of the theft as just one of those things that happens, something to be ridiculed rather than something that can or should be fought.

gnosis2• 14 years ago

I've heard of some comedians resorting to violence when some of their lines were "stolen" by other comics.

robmil5• 14 years ago

Stewart Lee has a brilliantly cutting routine about Joe Pasquale's joke-stealing, if anyone hasn't seen it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YE9Kthyaco

brownie• 14 years ago

One name comes to mind when you mention the above: Robin Williams. There is still talk of him paying off comics after indirectly doing their material on stage or on television.

ajanuary3• 14 years ago

This can sustain itself in part because there is a relatively clear divide between the mainstream and alternative comedy circuit.

Within the mainstream circuit there is much more of a culture of sharing material, so one can be of the opinion that joke theft is just something that happens on the mainstream circuit.

It doesn't majorly impact the victims on the alternative circuit because the audiences are different, and the concept of ownership of material within the alternative circuit is a lot stronger and so the people who matter will still attribute it to you.

I don't know enough about magic to know if there is or isn't a similar divide.

modeless• 14 years ago

As staunch libertarians, I would have thought that Penn and Teller would be against such strong IP protection.

eric_bullington• 14 years ago

Did you read the whole article? The ends suggests a twist.

Evbn2• 14 years ago

That would be so tasteless as do undermine decades of respect Teller has earned as an artist and a person.

Penn, on the other hand, would tell you he is going to lie about it, lie about it, then tell you he lied about it, and you still wouldn't be sure if he was lying about lying.

AndyNemmity13• 14 years ago

A suggestion which is unwarranted and obviously unfounded to anyone following the case closely.

lukevdp2• 14 years ago

They only do stuff like that when it's totally awesome... like faking Big foot: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xll6vp_sonoma-bigfoot-video...

tzs• 14 years ago

Libertarianism is rather diverse when it comes to IP. Some think there should be no IP (it infringes free speech). Some think there should be IP, but enforced through the market via contracts. And some, such as those who lean toward the Objectivist side of things, consider it essential.

lukevdp2• 14 years ago

Libertarians are all for property rights.

Penn has talked about this issue before on Penn Point as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlEBh_98lIo

dantheman• 14 years ago

Many think that intellectual property isn't property. Since it doesn't behave like property and is in fact a government granted monopoly.

nathannecro• 14 years ago

Just for easy reference, this is a video of Teller's 'Shadow".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=un1pNtmYguA

AndyNemmity13• 14 years ago

I think you should see the real version and not an explanation of the version first. Watching this could ruin the suspense and enjoyment one might find watching the real performance.

madprops• 14 years ago

Teller is boss

thaumaturgy• 14 years ago

I think the most common argument I hear against IP protections for software is that so much of it is obvious, or incremental. We have companies patenting and suing over techniques which are considered common knowledge by many programmers. How silly was it that Oracle's recent huge lawsuit ended up hinging on a range check function?

But is that the same as a masterful magic trick? And if not, should we treat it the same?

I don't think it's the same thing at all. A master magician might easily spend years practicing a trick -- the right mechanics, the right theatricality, anticipating the audience response, coming up with some new illusion -- and then, as the article describes, if that trick is self-contained enough, someone else might see it and work out how it's done and then sell the same trick to people who haven't invested anywhere near as much effort in practicing it.

So I don't think that we can say, well, this is just like software, it's an idea, and therefore we shouldn't protect it. I think that the very idea behind IP laws in the first place was to protect effort -- to safeguard someone's livelihood if they spent years developing an idea, so that someone else wouldn't simply come along immediately afterward and usurp the idea and rob that person of all of the effort that they invested in developing it.

There's this huge difference in effort between writing simple functions in software and developing masterful magic tricks, and we should recognize that.

Nor do I think that Penn & Teller are at all guilty of hypocrisy. I think it's enough to have just seen some episodes of Fool Us to see that they can have huge amounts of respect for magicians who copy their tricks, so long as those magicians add something unique to it. That's all they ask: take what we do, and do it better.

I can not imagine defending the reverse engineering and subsequent sale of someone else's unique illusion under the umbrella that "software patents are bad".

I am somewhat more dismayed that the article seemed to present a good enough case for this all on its own, but the discussion so far is ignoring it -- almost as if everyone just skimmed it.

pbhjpbhj• 14 years ago

>the very idea behind IP laws in the first place was to protect effort //

The idea from the point of view of the populus is to encourage innovation and open cultural expression. A corollary of that is the protection of livelihood of creators/inventors if that is required to support the general aims.

So are illusionists who're creating innovative cultural expressions of their art ceasing to create for want of funding and because others are following their lead? Or are such illusionists who create, model and use novel illusions able to generate a reasonable return for that good without additional IP protection and thus with the addition of such works entering the public domain at the earliest possible point.

[I concede I've not read the article yet (shock!) as it was blocked for me].

majormajor• 14 years ago

Part of the article discussed a "trick inventor" who's pretty much stopped coming up with new ones in favor of other things, like writing about the history of magic, since it's reaching the point where he couldn't make a profit on it:

  "Invention is all fuzzy, sloppy stuff," Steinmeyer says.
  "I have patents, and I have had patents that have expired.
  Everything has a limited lifetime. But when a person can't
  make a living by coming up with new material, that's when
  you have to wonder about the system. I would say that over
  the last few years, the last ten years, it's a net zero.
  I'm putting as much money into it as I'm getting out."

haberman• 14 years ago

> I think that the very idea behind IP laws in the first place was to protect effort

No, this is know as a "sweat of the brow" interpretation and has been rejected by the US Supreme Court. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow

Just because something takes effort does not mean it should be protected. Just because a person could make more money by having exclusivity does not mean that thing should be protected.

I haven't thought about the issue of magic tricks enough to know what I think about it, but I definitely resist the notion that something should be protected simply because it took work to create. That way leads to a society where everything is pay-per-view. For example, just because I scan an old book doesn't mean I should own a copyright on the scan.

eli• 14 years ago

For example, just because I scan an old book doesn't mean I should own a copyright on the scan.

Just to play devils advocate, why not? Wouldn't that result in many more old books being scanned that otherwise wouldn't be? Wouldn't competition force down the price of the popular old books?

einhverfr2• 14 years ago

I am fine with the literary aspects of it being protected provided that the practical aspects are not, or vice versa. Of if Teller wants the practical aspects protected, he can file for a patent, providing directions for someone reasonably skilled in the art, to understand what he is doing.

What I am not fine with is this idea that IP is protected for its own sake. We need to remember that it is a quid quo pro, and not merely a reward for entertainers.

pydave2• 14 years ago

  > I am fine with the literary aspects of it being protected 
  > provided that the practical aspects are not

I guess you're thinking along the lines of a playwright who sells scripts of her play, but cannot prevent people from performing the play (since they already bought the script)?

javajosh• 14 years ago

Am I the only one who believes, after reading this article, that Gerard Bakardy is a creation of Teller's?

Vivtek2• 14 years ago

Maybe he's Penn.

orjan• 14 years ago

I found this link that seems to be some kind of profile page for "The 2 from Antwerp": http://www.hozpitalityplus.com/profile/The2fromAntwerp There's a photo album with pictures of Gerard Dogge, e.g. http://www.hozpitalityplus.com/photo/gerard-1

So, if this is a hoax, it's a long time in the making (this page was last updated in November 2009).

gluegeorge• 14 years ago

this article is almost unreadably poorly written

roymabookie• 14 years ago

tried twice, couldn't finish it

pqdbr• 14 years ago

I've been to their vegas show this August and I swear, it's something that I'll carry for me for a long time, if not forever. I couldn't believe my eyes and the feeling of witnessing those tricks live right in front of you is indescribable.

naturalethic• 14 years ago

Illusions!

Bud• 14 years ago

It's easy to dismiss Teller because he works in Vegas in a rather quirky profession. But his is a peculiarly deep, sensitive and beautiful mind. I tend to love everything he writes, and most things written about him.

Vivtek2• 14 years ago

It's easy to dismiss Teller until you encounter Teller.

sneak• 14 years ago

I love Teller.

That said, you can't steal an idea. It's physically impossible. The original idea-haver still has it.

pydave2• 14 years ago

A lead pipe disagrees with you.

;)

asdfprou• 14 years ago

Link to Enoch Soames, if anyone is interested. http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/760/pg760.html

teyc• 14 years ago

taking this back to technology, and I'm thinking of Apple vs Samsung here. What do you all think?

Is scroll bounce magical, the way Teller's Shadow is? It is a lie, we all know that digital screens do not have bounces, and that's what surprises us and pleases us. What about slide to unlock?

Honestly, I'm torn by this. As much as I cherish things magical, I couldn't see how public interests would be served by giving these illusions exclusivity.

Teller on theft in magic

Related Stories