- Journal Archives
- Volume 18
- Volume 17
- Volume 16
- Volume 15
- Volume 14
- Volume 13
- Volume 12
- Volume 11
- Volume 10
- Volume 9
- Volume 8
- Volume 7
- Volume 6
- Volume 5
- Volume 4
- Volume 3
- Volume 2
- Volume 1
It turns out that magicians, masters of illusion and sleight of hand, may use their skills of evasion to avoid being served with a lawsuit. At least that is evidenced by the latest, strange development in a case involving one mysterious magic trick, the boundaries of copyright law, and shadows on a screen.
It all began with one astounding trick by Raymond Teller, of Penn and Teller fame. In this act, entitled “Shadows“, a vase filled with flowers stands on a table in front of a screen. A spotlight casts a shadow of the flowers onto the screen, and when Teller uses a knife to cut the flowers’ shadow on the screen, the corresponding part of the real flowers are cut simultaneously. Some consider it one of the most impressive magic tricks in the world. However, a Dutch magician named Gerard Dogge posted a Youtube video of himself performing the trick, and offered to reveal the “how-to” behind the trick for $3,050. Teller filed suit in April 2012, claiming copyright infringement and unfair competition under federal statute.
But according to Teller, he is not suing Dogge to protect the secret behind mastering the trick. Teller points out that over the years he has actually used three different methods to perform Shadows, though he will not reveal his third method, the one he currently uses. Instead, Teller is suing to protect the “magic” – to prevent his trick from becoming an ordinary performance by many.
Whether Teller actually has a legitimate copyright in his magic trick is another issue. In 1983 he wrote out the details of the trick and registered it with the Copyright Office. However, it is a fundamental distinction of copyright law that one cannot copyright ideas, but only the expression of those ideas. Perhaps Teller could try to seek copyright protection for Shadows as a pantomime or choreographic work, both of which are protected under the Copyright Act.
Recently, in February of this year, U.S. District Judge James Mahan provided an update on the case, ruling on several motions, and noting that Dogge has still evaded personal service and cannot be located in Europe, though Teller can prove that Dogge opened some court papers via email. Additionally, Dogge has been in contact with the court, in one instance to ask that the jury be comprised of only magicians (shockingly, this request was denied). Dogge is apparently now suing Teller in Belgium for defamation.
Despite the fact that Dogge continues to evade personal service, the case continues, and should it go to trial it will certainly be a seminal case in determining the boundaries of copyright law regarding the protection of magic tricks.
– Katharine Skinner
Recent Blog Posts
- Former Cardinals Executive Pleads Guilty to Hacking, But Will the Cardinals Pay the Price?
- Making a Murder – Technology in Forensic Evidence Questioned
- Is “smart gun” technology the future of gun safety?
- Why High-Profile Athletes’ Defamation Lawsuits Against Al Jazeera Are Nothing More Than a Hail Mary
- Executives of a Chinese Online Video-Sharing Service Provider Stood Trial for Internet Pornography
- The Rise of ‘Swatting’
Tagsadvertising antitrust Apple books career celebrities contracts copyright copyright infringement courts creative content criminal law entertainment Facebook FCC film/television financial First Amendment games Google government intellectual property internet JETLaw journalism lawsuits legislation media medicine Monday Morning JETLawg music NFL patents privacy progress publicity rights radio social networking sports Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) technology telecommunications trademarks Twitter U.S. Constitution