copyright a magic trick?

[revolutionmagic]

Michigan. There a website (several actually) where magic tricks can be purchased and downloaded. What they're selling is the secret to a magic trick. I recently posted a video revealing a magic trick on youtube that's for sale. The video is my own video, it is not the original downloaded video. I received a copyright notice from youtube saying the description of my video has a link to a pirated video. My question is, am I violating any copyright laws or infringing on any works since the material is that of my own, and I'm merely teaching others what I've learned?

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Does your video description have a link to a pirated video? That is the claim.

 

[quincy]

Michigan. There a website (several actually) where magic tricks can be purchased and downloaded. What they're selling is the secret to a magic trick. I recently posted a video revealing a magic trick on youtube that's for sale. The video is my own video, it is not the original downloaded video. I received a copyright notice from youtube saying the description of my video has a link to a pirated video. My question is, am I violating any copyright laws or infringing on any works since the material is that of my own, and I'm merely teaching others what I've learned?

If you have linked to a pirated video, you could be infringing. If the material on your video borrows heavily from any rights-protected material on the original video, you could be infringing. Apparently someone thinks you are infringing on their copyright, at any rate.

 

[revolutionmagic]

why will you delete my post? I don't understand, and no, i'm not linking to a pirated video here, I'm simply teaching a method behind a trick that's for sale in my own video and in my own words.

 

[quincy]

why will you delete my post? I don't understand, and no, i'm not linking to a pirated video here, I'm simply teaching a method behind a trick that's for sale in my own video and in my own words.

I can't explain why you were notified of infringement. Has your video been pulled? What did the notice of copyright say on the video you purchased and downloaded, and/or what were the terms of purchase on the video? Was the magic-trick-video that you purchased and downloaded a legal copy or could it have been a pirated copy?

How was your video described for YouTube?

For a clear determination, you can have your video reviewed personally by a professional in your area - for a side-by-side comparison of yours to the original - to see if there is some legitimate copyright problem that exists.

 

[revolutionmagic]

yeah my video got pulled from youtube, I can actually counter claim it, and if I do counter-claim, the one who filed the initial complaint gets all my information as far as where I live, my phone number, etc.....but if I do counter claim, they would then have to sue me in order to keep the video off. I didn't do a verbatim, I simply taught how a trick was done, that's all. I did a little researching and came across this document.

Section 102 of the Copyright Act (title 17 of the
U.S.
Code
“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.”

If I'm understanding this correctly, I should be able to freely share any information I wish to since I'm teaching ideas, procedures, and methods along with principles in magic and concepts for accomplishing these magic tricks for sale, whether they're for sale or not? Should I counter claim?
It's saying you can't own an idea, or a method is how I see it.
you would however I believe own a performance right, but this would be something different and un-related to my approach in teaching

 

[quincy]

yeah my video got pulled from youtube, I can actually counter claim it, and if I do counter-claim, the one who filed the initial complaint gets all my information as far as where I live, my phone number, etc.....but if I do counter claim, they would then have to sue me in order to keep the video off. I didn't do a verbatim, I simply taught how a trick was done, that's all. I did a little researching and came across this document.

Section 102 of the Copyright Act (title 17 of the
U.S.
Code
“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.”

If I'm understanding this correctly, I should be able to freely share any information I wish to since I'm teaching ideas, procedures, and methods along with principles in magic and concepts for accomplishing these magic tricks for sale, whether they're for sale or not? Should I counter claim?
It's saying you can't own an idea, or a method is how I see it.
you would however I believe own a performance right, but this would be something different and un-related to my approach in teaching

I can't tell you whether to file a counter notice or not. That needs to be decided by you, preferably after you have had the facts reviewed by an attorney in your area.

You are right that the methods and processes involved in performing a magic trick are not copyrightable (although magic tricks can possibly have patent protection, trade secret protection and trademark protection).

And there have been lawsuits filed in the past by magicians over their magic being copied and their tricks revealed (they have not met with much success).

But, even though the method or process involved in doing a magic trick is not copyrightable, the expressions of the method or process for doing the trick could be copyrightable, as can the appearance of a trick as it is performed in a video. Written descriptions of how a trick is performed can be copyrighted.

You mentioned the description of your video, and you mentioned it as possibly containing a link to a pirated video. This seems to be where the problem is centered, and not with your video itself (although if you copied any of the original video, this can potentially be a problem for you).

Because we cannot see your video and compare it to the original video (or the video you downloaded), and we cannot tell if you downloaded an illegal copy of a copyrighted video, and we do not have access to the terms of purchase for the video you downloaded, and we cannot guess with any sort of accuracy if your video was pulled with good reason or not, you really need the personal review by a professional in your area, if you want to have your video returned to its place online.

 

[revolutionmagic]

I know, it's probably a grey area, but here's where I'm coming from I guess....
and no, it was only the claim of linking to a pirated video, I never linked to a pirated video.
I made 1 video that was the demo of the trick
I made a 2nd video that was the reveal video, this video I made unlisted.
the 2nd video was linked to from the 1st video
my 1st video (the demo of the trick) was in fact the one that had the claim put against it, but it wasn't for performance, it was a claim that my video linked to their pirated video.

the expressions of the method or process for doing the trick could be copyrightable, as can the appearance of a trick as it is performed in a video

expressions? not sure what it means, if I say something with a southern drawl and they did in the original video?
and no, the method and process can't be copyrightable from what .gov says.
and the appearance wouldn't be copyrightable, or people wouldn't buy a trick in order to never be able to perform it to begin with.

I have to imagine here that they're really just not wanting to lose sales in this instance, so they tried to and successfully had my video taken down.

I mean, if I come up with a method for how to solve a math problem, and I sell this method.....someone who buys it should be able to turn around and do whatever they wish with it from my understanding. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

[quincy]

I know, it's probably a grey area, but here's where I'm coming from I guess....
and no, it was only the claim of linking to a pirated video, I never linked to a pirated video.
I made 1 video that was the demo of the trick
I made a 2nd video that was the reveal video, this video I made unlisted.
the 2nd video was linked to from the 1st video
my 1st video (the demo of the trick) was in fact the one that had the claim put against it, but it wasn't for performance, it was a claim that my video linked to their pirated video.

the expressions of the method or process for doing the trick could be copyrightable, as can the appearance of a trick as it is performed in a video

expressions? not sure what it means, if I say something with a southern drawl and they did in the original video?
and no, the method and process can't be copyrightable from what .gov says.
and the appearance wouldn't be copyrightable, or people wouldn't buy a trick in order to never be able to perform it to begin with.

I have to imagine here that they're really just not wanting to lose sales in this instance, so they tried to and successfully had my video taken down.

I mean, if I come up with a method for how to solve a math problem, and I sell this method.....someone who buys it should be able to turn around and do whatever they wish with it from my understanding. Maybe I'm wrong.

"Expression" is the form an idea takes or how it is presented (e.g., the idea is boy meets girl, an expression of that idea is "Romeo and Juliet"). Copyrighted works must be creative, original and fixed in a tangible form (written, recorded, on canvas...) to be afforded protection under copyright law.

Spoken words, for example, are not copyrightable unless they are recorded or written down or otherwise preserved. Recording or writing down the words is what allows the words to be copyright-protected.

A method and process can be protected - just not under the copyright law. There are patent laws (which can prevent someone from performing a trick) and there are trade secret laws (to prevent others from revealing how a trick is done).

The way something is performed can be protected. Choreography, for example, is copyright protectable.

For a magic trick video, there can be many different videos of the trick and the trick can be performed by many different people. How these people perform the trick, however - how the trick is introduced on video, how it is explained, all the bells and whistles that go along with presenting the trick - can be copyright-protected.

That said, it is entirely possible that there was a claim of infringement made against you only because the other video producer feared your video would cut into his sales. Perhaps it was thought you would not argue the removal of your video from YouTube.

If you review the facts with an attorney in your area, you can tell better if you have anything to fear by filing a counter notice. The response to your counter notice, however, would be a lawsuit - so I recommend you make sure you are on solid legal ground before disputing their claim.

Good luck, revolutionmagic.

 

[revolutionmagic]

from the sounds of it, it looks like i'm in the clear, I never signed a disclosure, so the trade secret thing wouldn't hold up, there was no agreement ever made.

people very very rarely ever say they've patented a performance, cause you can look up how a trick is done then, so hardly any point in selling the thing there.

people can reverse engineer a trick or come up with their own method for doing the same thing as it is anyway, so no purchase is even necessary some of the time for someone to reveal something.

I can understand if a verbatim video was what I produced and I said everything exactly the same way, but I went off the top of my head so that's no where near possible.

you said that Choreography, for example, is copyright protectable, and you're right, but that's a helluva hard thing to try and argue.

I mean it'd be the same thing if I read a how-to cook book and revealed a recipe for how to cook a scrambled egg to my neighbor or on youtube I can't see how they could come after me, likewise with this instance. There's hundreds upon hundreds of cookbooks actually competing for peoples cash, just because someone has a similar recipe or even identical, doesn't mean they go around suing each other.
Presentation might be copyrightable, but that's gotta be something that's hard to win even if it's similar.
There's only so many ways to put an egg on a plate
there's only so many ways to hold a deck of cards and do a similar card trick.

I don't have the money to consult a lawyer, or afford a lawsuit, but I'm prety dang sure I'm in the clear.
if I counter, they have 10 days to act...if they don't act, my video gets reupped to youtube. I'm considering the counder quite heavily, I can't fathom them having a leg to stand on.

 

[quincy]

from the sounds of it, it looks like i'm in the clear, I never signed a disclosure, so the trade secret thing wouldn't hold up, there was no agreement ever made.

people very very rarely ever say they've patented a performance, cause you can look up how a trick is done then, so hardly any point in selling the thing there.

people can reverse engineer a trick or come up with their own method for doing the same thing as it is anyway, so no purchase is even necessary some of the time for someone to reveal something.

I can understand if a verbatim video was what I produced and I said everything exactly the same way, but I went off the top of my head so that's no where near possible.

you said that Choreography, for example, is copyright protectable, and you're right, but that's a helluva hard thing to try and argue.

I mean it'd be the same thing if I read a how-to cook book and revealed a recipe for how to cook a scrambled egg to my neighbor or on youtube I can't see how they could come after me, likewise with this instance. There's hundreds upon hundreds of cookbooks actually competing for peoples cash, just because someone has a similar recipe or even identical, doesn't mean they go around suing each other.
Presentation might be copyrightable, but that's gotta be something that's hard to win even if it's similar.
There's only so many ways to put an egg on a plate
there's only so many ways to hold a deck of cards and do a similar card trick.

I don't have the money to consult a lawyer, or afford a lawsuit, but I'm prety dang sure I'm in the clear.
if I counter, they have 10 days to act...if they don't act, my video gets reupped to youtube. I'm considering the counder quite heavily, I can't fathom them having a leg to stand on.

Well, if you are "pretty dang sure" you are in the clear and want to file a counter notice and take the chance they won't file suit against you, I certainly can't stop you.

If you are dealing with the DMCA, however, the person who filed the notice against you swore to the truth of the facts as presented, under penalty of perjury, and, when you file a counter notice, you must do the same. There can be some pretty stiff penalties for misrepresenting facts and filing a false claim or counter claim.

I hope you are sure of your facts. Good luck.

 

[tranquility]

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130304/03161322186/magician-sued-teller-copyright-infringement-has-tried-disappearing-act-response.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120417/04275318521/disappointing-teller-sues-other-magician-doing-same-trick.shtml
http://www.esquire.com/features/teller-magician-interview-1012
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/04/silent-magician-teller-files-copyright-suit-over-stolen-shadow-trick/
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1005564

 

[FlyingRon]

Here's the actual complaint from Teller:

http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/nevada/nvdce/2:2012cv00591/86951/1/

 

[justalayman]

no, it was only the claim of linking to a pirated video, I never linked to a pirated video.

did it say you actually linked to the video (as in a hyperlink) or you provided a link to a pirated video.

saying the description of my video has a link

has A link. If you provide a web address without it being an active link, that could be described as having A link.

I mean, if I come up with a method for how to solve a math problem, and I sell this method.....someone who buys it should be able to turn around and do whatever they wish with it from my understanding. Maybe I'm wrong.

You may or may not be wrong, depending on the specifics of everything but one thing you are is being somewhat of a jerk in your responses here. You are being given some great info and responses based on the law and you appear to want to argue rather than accept what you are being given.

but beyond any of the legalities, here are the realities:

I don't have the money to consult a lawyer, or afford a lawsuit, but I'm prety dang sure I'm in the clear.
if I counter, they have 10 days to act...if they don't act, my video gets reupped to youtube. I'm considering the counder quite heavily, I can't fathom them having a leg to stand on.

you say you don't have the money to even consult a lawyer. So, let's say you are actually in the right here and dispute the notice as a resulting action. They believe they are in the right, or maybe they know they aren't but are willing to argue the point. If they can afford a lawyer and are willing to take the next steps, you either buckle because you can't afford a lawyer and pay the resulting costs or you spend the money on a lawyer to defend yourself. Either way it could cost you considerable money; win or lose.


so, are you willing to play the game and run the risk of being sued? The ball is in your court.

 

[quincy]

I agree with justalayman that it may come down to who has the most money and not necessarily who has the legal rights.

Magicians have been suing over their magic tricks and secrets since 1938, and it has been determined by courts in the past that magic tricks are, on their own, not copyrightable.

Even if a magician were to patent a magic trick (which has been done), this only prevents the trick from being performed. It does not prevent anyone from telling others how the trick can be performed. In fact, in getting a patent, the magician reveals the trick's secret to the public.

Magicians who need the help of others to perform a special trick will have confidentiality agreements, non-disclosure agreements, signed by all involved - and these are good as long as those who sign the agreements are good about not violating the agreement (which has been done). The agreements, however, are court-enforceable, so there is less of a likelihood of secrets being revealed when there are NDAs in place.

Many magicians have a Code of Ethics which they tend to abide by but, again, this is only as good as the magicians who agree to abide by the Code.

There have been, as I said, several suits filed by magicians in the past and the magicians do not fare well in these suits. The legal actions best taken by magicians would not be in protecting their magic tricks but in protecting their performances of it. Herein lies Teller's best hope for a successful outcome of his copyright claim - if, that is, the videos said to be infringing on Teller's rights are ever found or recovered through computer forensics (doubtful at this point).