Just a question as to what anyone thinks about building an effect that the builder does not and does not plan to make anymore. They were not the original builders in the first place but had somehow obtained the rights to do so. They did not get enough orders to continue making them and most likely will not again.

Now to the question. If I had my builder make one for me, I don't think that most would have a problem, but, I have had others inquire about getting one. Is it wrong for me to sell them?

I don't think that the above "past" manufacturer would deserve any dues and the originator is long gone. How long does the originator receive royalties?

It seems to me that might be a bit of a sticky question. It, of course, depends on the item to some degree. For example, dozens of cottage industry builders make for dealers a number of standard effects-- die boxes, linking rings, hat tears, square circles, machined coins to name only a few. These effects are so common, and so grandfathered in, that no one expects royalties.

If the effect you are building is in this category, I do not think it would be a problem. If, on the other hand, you are building something that is cleary anothers origination-- such as a trick by Steinmeyer, Andrew Mayne or another creator, then you could have a problem ethically and maybe legally.

Most magic effects are not patented, due to the costs involved and the fact that, with the patent, you have to explain the method-- which bums out magicians. So your decision may come down more to an ethical dilemma than a legal matter. If you believe someone holds the rights to this, you might contact them and get permission to build their prop to sell to others. Sometimes these folks will say -- go for it! Other times they might want a cut. Other times they will say "forget it." Either way that would be good to know. Because if you started to make the effect, and this person started complaining, it would create a hassle you surely do not need in your life.

Quack

Quack,
Thanks for your comments. I think that this would fall under the "standard effects" as it is a wrist chopper that is not made any more. It is not the chopper but the look of the apparatus that I and some others are interested in. I don't think that it would be any different than putting a different front on a square circle.

Kent

I do not know all wrist choppers available, but most of them have a common method--as in disecto with the handle, or many work like a big finger chopper. I would think making anything like this would fall under standard. If, on the other hand, you were building something that cloned the Grant/Mak effect where the wrist "visually" drops into the bag...a very unique method...then that kind of copy would be a problem.
quack

No, I wouldn't do that. This method may be around but no one is making this one. I would not copy the art work as that may be protected. But the same idea would be used.