10 ms·

Teller on theft in magic

156 points by robmil 14y ago

robmil 14y 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 14y 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 14y ago
    My take on the article was that the fight is against taking something beautiful and magical and making it pedestrian through unartful performance.
    - AndyNemmity 14y ago
      Even if the performance was artful he'd be against it, so although that is relevant in the current case, it's not actually meaningful.
  - robmil 14y 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.
    - lmm 14y ago
      I feel there's a parallel with music here. Does hearing a great song croaked out by a hack at a wedding devalue the original? Perhaps. But for society it's worth it overall; so many bands get their start doing other people's material. In fact many musicians are only able to keep making music because of a "day job" in a cover band. Perhaps magic tricks should have the same thing: an automatic license for "covers", where if you want to perform someone else's trick you pay a standardized, small fee to the original inventor.
AndyNemmity 14y ago
Gerard Bakardy reuploaded his version http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkq4XfFgCYs 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.
- robmil 14y 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.
  - grandalf 14y 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.
    - AndyNemmity 14y ago
      Copying is not considered respectable if attribution is given... The general rule is you are to ask the individual you are copying if you can copy them in which case they will say no unless they sell the trick, or you can argue that you independently came up with the trick, and the person agrees with you. Copying is always considered "theft" even with attribution unless there's specific permission. There is a case where a performer does magic to the same song (Shape of my heart), but with different actual magic performance and it is considered copying. *Edited to improve my tone, the person I responded to deserves good faith and seems quite reasonable.
      - gnosis 14y ago
        That so many magicians are so possessive of their precious "secrets" and that so many of them are against sharing (even with other magicians), came as rather a big shock and disappointment for me when I got interested in magic. I spent most of my life in the opensource and academic communities, where free sharing of techniques and knowledge was not only commonplace but encouraged. It's very sad that much of the magic world is so anti-sharing and so jealously guard the knowledge they possess from each other (unless you can pony up their asking price). This aspect of parts of the magic community is a huge turn off for me.
thesash 14y ago
What's true for magic is true for tech: "Invention is all fuzzy, sloppy stuff"
- AndyNemmity 14y 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.
  - thesash 14y ago
    I think the analogue would be design, as opposed to code, see Apple v. Samsung case
udpheaders 14y ago
Ringling Bros and Barnum & Bailey Clown College It was worth the read just for that alone.
robmil 14y 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.
- gnosis 14y ago
  I've heard of some comedians resorting to violence when some of their lines were "stolen" by other comics.
  - robmil 14y 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 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YE9Kthyaco
- brownie 14y 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.
- ajanuary 14y 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 14y ago
As staunch libertarians, I would have thought that Penn and Teller would be against such strong IP protection.
- eric_bullington 14y ago
  Did you read the whole article? The ends suggests a twist.
  - Evbn 14y 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.
  - AndyNemmity 14y ago
    A suggestion which is unwarranted and obviously unfounded to anyone following the case closely.
  - lukevdp 14y 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-hoax_tech http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xll6vp_sonoma-bigfoot-video...
- tzs 14y 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.
- lukevdp 14y 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 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlEBh_98lIo
nathannecro 14y ago
Just for easy reference, this is a video of Teller's 'Shadow". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=un1pNtmYguA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=un1pNtmYguA
- AndyNemmity 14y 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 14y ago
Teller is boss
thaumaturgy 14y 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 14y 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].
javajosh 14y ago
Am I the only one who believes, after reading this article, that Gerard Bakardy is a creation of Teller's?
- Vivtek 14y ago
  Maybe he's Penn.
- orjan 14y 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 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 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 14y ago
this article is almost unreadably poorly written
- roymabookie 14y ago
  tried twice, couldn't finish it
pqdbr 14y 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 14y ago
  Illusions!
Bud 14y 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.
- Vivtek 14y ago
  It's easy to dismiss Teller until you encounter Teller.
sneak 14y ago
I love Teller. That said, you can't steal an idea. It's physically impossible. The original idea-haver still has it.
- pydave 14y ago
  A lead pipe disagrees with you. ;)
asdfprou 14y ago
Link to Enoch Soames, if anyone is interested. http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/760/pg760.html http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/760/pg760.html
teyc 14y 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.

156 points by robmil 14y 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 14y 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 14y ago
  My take on the article was that the fight is against taking something beautiful and magical and making it pedestrian through unartful performance.
  - AndyNemmity 14y ago
    Even if the performance was artful he'd be against it, so although that is relevant in the current case, it's not actually meaningful.
- robmil 14y 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.
  - lmm 14y ago
    I feel there's a parallel with music here. Does hearing a great song croaked out by a hack at a wedding devalue the original? Perhaps. But for society it's worth it overall; so many bands get their start doing other people's material. In fact many musicians are only able to keep making music because of a "day job" in a cover band. Perhaps magic tricks should have the same thing: an automatic license for "covers", where if you want to perform someone else's trick you pay a standardized, small fee to the original inventor.

AndyNemmity 14y ago

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

robmil 14y 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.
- grandalf 14y 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.
  - AndyNemmity 14y ago
    Copying is not considered respectable if attribution is given... The general rule is you are to ask the individual you are copying if you can copy them in which case they will say no unless they sell the trick, or you can argue that you independently came up with the trick, and the person agrees with you. Copying is always considered "theft" even with attribution unless there's specific permission. There is a case where a performer does magic to the same song (Shape of my heart), but with different actual magic performance and it is considered copying. *Edited to improve my tone, the person I responded to deserves good faith and seems quite reasonable.
    - gnosis 14y ago
      That so many magicians are so possessive of their precious "secrets" and that so many of them are against sharing (even with other magicians), came as rather a big shock and disappointment for me when I got interested in magic. I spent most of my life in the opensource and academic communities, where free sharing of techniques and knowledge was not only commonplace but encouraged. It's very sad that much of the magic world is so anti-sharing and so jealously guard the knowledge they possess from each other (unless you can pony up their asking price). This aspect of parts of the magic community is a huge turn off for me.

thesash 14y ago

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

AndyNemmity 14y 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.
- thesash 14y ago
  I think the analogue would be design, as opposed to code, see Apple v. Samsung case

udpheaders 14y ago

Ringling Bros and Barnum & Bailey Clown College It was worth the read just for that alone.

robmil 14y 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.

gnosis 14y ago
I've heard of some comedians resorting to violence when some of their lines were "stolen" by other comics.
- robmil 14y 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 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YE9Kthyaco
brownie 14y 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.
ajanuary 14y 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 14y ago

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

eric_bullington 14y ago
Did you read the whole article? The ends suggests a twist.
- Evbn 14y 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.
- AndyNemmity 14y ago
  A suggestion which is unwarranted and obviously unfounded to anyone following the case closely.
- lukevdp 14y 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-hoax_tech http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xll6vp_sonoma-bigfoot-video...
tzs 14y 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.
lukevdp 14y 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 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlEBh_98lIo

nathannecro 14y ago

Just for easy reference, this is a video of Teller's 'Shadow". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=un1pNtmYguA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=un1pNtmYguA

AndyNemmity 14y 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 14y ago

Teller is boss

thaumaturgy 14y 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 14y 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].

javajosh 14y ago

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

Vivtek 14y ago
Maybe he's Penn.
orjan 14y 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 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 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 14y ago

this article is almost unreadably poorly written

roymabookie 14y ago
tried twice, couldn't finish it

pqdbr 14y 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 14y ago
Illusions!

Bud 14y 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.

Vivtek 14y ago
It's easy to dismiss Teller until you encounter Teller.

sneak 14y ago

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

pydave 14y ago
A lead pipe disagrees with you. ;)

asdfprou 14y ago

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

teyc 14y 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.