hbomberguy / Harry "Harris" Brewis / Slazenger Rapemachine Whiteshaf - "Rational" SJW, former SA goon/LPer, sexual harassment apologist, raised $350K+ for child abuse cult

[BrunoMattei]

Nobody argued otherwise. My point is that he should have bought the rights using the hundreds of thousands of dollars he made off the video. Instead, he decided to keep that money, deprive the authors, remove the video people loved (in part because of the writing of the original authors), and then upload an inferior version.

I can't even make that point without people getting upset that I agreed with a gross angloid.


Yes? This is like page 3 in 30 minutes.

I agree. That would have been an easy solution. Give the article writer 5-10% of ad revenue and I think that would be fair.

 

[Cheeseknife]

Why is null dick riding a breadtube faggot who's a confirmed lolcow so hard

At worst ih copied an article than worked it out behind closed doors

If it makes a video flagging himself and going over every detail he did to make it right will null stop dick riding faggots?

I don't understand it either. Even if the whole plagerism stuff is accurate, Harris is clearly just in it for the grift. There's nothing altruistic about Harris's motivations. Harris's entire argument, even if well-spoken, is still in bad faith.

 

[Null]

why you've assumed he was trying to hide anything, or why you keep thinking he personally stole the material.

He took down the video. He obfuscated the issue. He changed the video to an inferior version. He reuploaded it.

After the DMCA, IH was personally made aware of the plagiarism. IH's response was to deprive the original authors of profit made through their writing and then personally create and re-upload the inferior version.

The original theft might have (with the most generous interpretation possible) been a total accident. The response was not. The response was IH personally.

Piracy and plenty of media content has been hosted on this site without you getting strapped up in anger.

Archives are fair use. The context of archiving content on this site exists for criticism and ridicule. IH's use of the article was to deprive the authors of their market and make money off of it. If you disagree with this assessment, you should leave.

I don't understand it either. Even if the whole plagerism stuff is accurate, Harris is clearly just in it for the grift. There's nothing altruistic about his motivations.

Maybe. He's still right. Why can't people just admit it?

 

[reptile101]

If not a big deal and who cares why are you running defense, if you didn't care wouldn't you just shrug and go talk about something else?

I kinda am Ive just been lurking reading the dumb shit while waiting for work. Only logged in to ask why null cared so much. Kinda done now since null answered

Personally idc if you guys wanna talk shit about ih go ahead I just can't grasp the hatred for at worst copying an article, go nuts though have fun

 

[Articles and Nudes]

He took down the video. He obfuscated the issue. He changed the video to an inferior version. He reuploaded it.

Or perhaps the plagiarism was brought to his attention, and he took steps to make amends with the original owner once realised. Why are you assuming he tried to pass it off as his own work when he's done no such thing before, and has made a point of crediting sources in the past?

Are you privy to the communication that went on between them?

Archives are fair use. The context of archiving content on this site exists for criticism and ridicule. IH's use of the article was to deprive the authors of their market and make money off of it. If you disagree with this assessment, you should leave.

Oh sure, all those links to games, films, THOT porn and so on are truly for the sake of ridicule. Gotcha, wink.

Do give over, Null.

 

[Getting Sentimental]

Maybe. He's still right. Why can't people just admit it?

Ok,

Harris is correct that IH commited plagiarism.

It is also correct that the situation has been resolved for over 6 months and is only being brought up by Harris sandwiched in a video discussing 2 cases of serial plagiarism because he has an axe to grind with IH for being an edgy boy in the past.

He has no issue with content theft if it involves people he associates with like Hasan, so I'm not going to pretend like him being right in this single case means that he isn't blatantly putting it in the worst light to manipulate people using every trick in the book solely due to his axe being a bit dull after a year.

 

[Anti Snigger]

The IH discussion has been exhausted at this point, it's just going in circles. There's another 200 minutes of video that can be discussed outside of that.

 

[Null]

Why are you assuming he tried to pass it off as his own

Because he did. Like, that's what happened.

Once more, and I will not say this again: If he had reached an agreement with the original authors, the original version would still be up. It is not, so I am very safe in assuming they did not reach an agreement.

Oh sure, all those links to games, films, THOT porn and so on are truly for the sake of ridicule. Gotcha, wink.

Links are not infringing. Pornographic content is not exempted from fair use.

However, since you believe this is a piracy website and that theft is OK, you are now a legal liability to me. Sorry.

He has no issue with content theft if it involves people he associates with like Hasan, so I'm not going to pretend like him being right in this single case means that he isn't blatantly putting it in the worst light to manipulate people using every trick in the book solely due to his axe being a bit dull after a year.

That's hypocritical then. I guess that's why this guy is such a huge faggot.

 

[RoaryTheDinosaur]

Spare us the concern about money. Piracy and plenty of media content has been hosted on this site without you getting strapped up in anger.

Exactly, this is why all onlyfans business kweens are in the right with the copyright claims because it deprives them of money that is rightfully theirs. If the content wasn't posted here then statistically at least one person would've paid for the nudes so by hosting the image here for free the farms is taking money out of the mouths of these girlbosses.
But in all seriousness its hard to hear Null say he is a copyright abolitionist and will steal as much from discord as possible for one of his Sneed projects while still defending the content farm that is mental floss in a video that also shits on content farms. The article was done well, but doesn't follow proper citations so that could be argued as plagarism, but also it's a bit of a who gives a fuck issue. The original article was from 2018 and wasn't likely generating any more revenue when the video came out and if anything the amount of advertising dollars generated on the original article probably increased from the controversy.
IH or somebody in a staff (still his fault though) did plagiarize but it's also not like most people were going to read the article on their own. Most people want a video to condense shit and repackage it in an easy way to be consumed in an easy and slightly humorous way which is what that video is. It's why video essays are a thing rather than a blogpost. It is transformative but it is shitty on IH's end but also likely caused less of a loss of ad revenue to the article than onlyfans models nudes being shared for free.

 

[Top Skink]

IH's use of the article was to deprive the authors of their market and make money off of it. If you disagree with this assessment, you should leave.

I support the action of plagiarism and believe both journalists and academics deserve at best to have their livelihoods torched, specifically through college students avoiding wasting time on retarded research projects, but I will accept shitty gimmick youtube videos if they also hurt and harm journalists and academics in the process
you are gay if you disagree with me

and i will not leave, cope and sneed

 

[Sargon's wife's son]

Nobody argued otherwise. My point is that he should have bought the rights using the hundreds of thousands of dollars he made off the video. Instead, he decided to keep that money, deprive the authors, remove the video people loved (in part because of the writing of the original authors), and then upload an inferior version.

I can't even make that point without people getting upset that I agreed with a gross angloid.


Yes? This is like page 3 in 30 minutes.

And these people make tens of thousands of dollars by making s***** video essays based on using the exact same media critique style that I could find from a bunch of annoying left-wing academics they owe those people money

Cool why didn't they take it to court it's almost like the authors of the article don't care a lot and the person making this has an ax to grind and isn't doing it because they have a principled stance against plagiarism or else they wouldn't be friends with himbo Hassan who makes internet historian look like the most honest person in the world.

 

[Null]

If the content wasn't posted here then statistically at least one person would've paid for the nudes so by hosting the image here for free the farms is taking money out of the mouths of these girlbosses.

Completely wrong. Copyrighted content found in threads on this forum is accessed by people critical of the people involved. It is a legally distinct market, and the copyrighted material is necessary for the criticism. I would argue that literally not a single person has ever accessed the Kiwi Farms to see something that would otherwise be behind a paywall. It is always that the user, hostile to the author, is accessing the forum and incidentally sees things as a part of a critical commentary.

But in all seriousness its hard to hear Null say he is a copyright abolitionist and will steal as much from discord as possible for one of his Sneed projects while still defending the content farm that is mental floss in a video that also shits on content farms.

What? Because Sneedchat is visually similar to Discord? You can't copyright, patent, or trademark a website design. That's also case law. Discord's layout is what most people using chatrooms are used to now so that's why they look similar.

If you guys are just going to start accusing me of theft and the Kiwi Farms of being a piracy site, I am just going to start rolling heads

 

[Null]

Cool why didn't they take it to court it's almost like the authors of the article don't care a lot and the person making this has an ax to grind and isn't doing it because they have a principled stance against plagiarism or else they wouldn't be friends with himbo Hassan who makes internet historian look like the most honest person in the world.

See:

DMCA is required as a first step to the lawsuit. IH agreed he was in the wrong legally and removed the video. If they sued him moving forward, it would have to be for something other than copyright infringement (plagiarism or conversion, for example), which is harder.

 

[flipwizardmagoo]

Yep, it was a dick move that he stole this guy's article. That's basically the point. You can dial back your emotional involvement in defending him. Cheers.


DMCA is required as a first step to the lawsuit. IH agreed he was in the wrong legally and removed the video. If they sued him moving forward, it would have to be for something other than copyright infringement (plagiarism or conversion, for example), which is harder.


Nope. If the original video went up, it would be safe to assume otherwise. The new video is proof he did not acquire rights to resolve the DMCA.

You know what they say about assuming.

 

[MooseGump]

I feel like people would agree with null's point better if this expose was made by anyone that isn't hbomberguy

 

[Getting Sentimental]

That's hypocritical then. I guess that's why this guy is such a huge faggot.

I apologize for not focusing too hard on the unknown details of the IH/Mentalfloss settlement and instead focusing on the rank hypocrisy of the video creator in the thread named after him.

 

[Cheeseknife]

Maybe. He's still right. Why can't people just admit it?

It's not a matter of him being factually correct. People are upset about the hypocrisy. Frankly, aren't you the least bit curious as to why Harris targeted these people specifically while there are most definitely other more egregious examples he overlooked? Folks here have mentioned Hasan, for instance. If this isn't a case for your Grift Wars then I don't know what is.

 

[ScatmansWorld]

You are wrong. This is a lolcow thread and a lolcow drama video.

Ben Shapiro and Donald J Trump also have lolcow threads, but that doesn't mean they aren't political figures that naturally bring with them political conversations. You have to accept that the specific people you feature decides the amount of political discourse in the forums.

 

[Anti Snigger]

I feel like people would agree with null's point better if this expose was made by anyone that isn't hbomberguy

People are pigeonholing themselves too hard. I think IH not citing the article is dumb, but ultimately it changes nothing for me as a viewer. I do wish he had done it, as it would have cost him nothing at the time, and it would have averted quite literally this.
Whether or not you get your panties into a twist about plagiarism, from a pure cost-benefit analysis perspective, it was a poor move.

 

[Hitchhiker]

I support the action of plagiarism and believe both journalists and academics deserve at best to have their livelihoods torched, specifically through college students avoiding wasting time on retarded research projects, but I will accept shitty gimmick youtube videos if they also hurt and harm journalists and academics in the process
you are gay if you disagree with me

and i will not leave, cope and sneed

I agree. The original authors can get fucked for all anyone should care. It is not a physical theft, Internet Historian has not deprived the original authors of anything tangible. If someone were going to read that article they would have done so, Internet Historian added on to it, and introduced it to a new audience.

The video with all of the editing, animations, voice acting is a significantly better product than the original article. If the actual sub-human journalist didn't want his article plagiarized then he should have made a better product to incentivize people to consume his product, rather than Internet Historians.

The end result of this type of plagiarism is a better product for people to consume, which is the best outcome for the consumer, and promotes competition.