Internet Historian Appreciation Thread - The best thing to come out of Austrailia since Mad Max (The original, obviously)

[wtfNeedSignUp]

How the fuck is copying a timeline of a real world event even plagiarism to begin with? Compiling an event happenings is not creating a new content in any way. What's next, plagiarism on word definitions? Can't you say the same on every youtuber that just goes into KF and copies popular posts to summarize a cow?

It happened the same with DTRH. Autists think that any amount of dirty work entitles them to the information within.

 

[Anonitolia]

Using your logic I can make a movie "based" on a Brandon Sanderson book and as long as I rewrite the book in "my style" using a good chunk of his book as the script, then I can sell the movie without his permission, with a different name than the book, and without mentioning Sanderson at all until he threatens to sue me, and I'm forced to remake a third of my movie and put "based on the works of Brandon Sanderson" burred in the end credits.

Is this not Disney's entire M.O?

 

[Spaceman Spud]

You guys are operating on a 7th graders understanding of plagiarism where you just control C control V an entire article into an English paper.
Using your logic I can make a movie "based" on a Brandon Sanderson book and as long as I rewrite the book in "my style" using a good chunk of his book as the script, then I can sell the movie without his permission, with a different name than the book, and without mentioning Sanderson at all until he threatens to sue me, and I'm forced to remake a third of my movie and put "based on the works of Brandon Sanderson" burred in the end credits.
Right at the beginning of the bomber video he shows an example of plagiarism where an author tried to pitch his book to a media company exec. The exec turned it down then made a tv show ripping off his book, and the executive lied and pretended he never met with the author in the first place.

It's a fucking youtube video, nigger. Also Brandon Sanderson is reddit as hell. Get some better taste in literature.
Hopefully this purge of all the gay lefty subscribers encourages IH to go back to making "edgy" content about failed conventions again.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

Right at the beginning of the bomber video he shows an example of plagiarism where an author tried to pitch his book to a media company exec. The exec turned it down then made a tv show ripping off his book, and the executive lied and pretended he never met with the author in the first place.

Literally has fuck all to do with my comment, but okay.

Using your logic I can make a movie "based" on a Brandon Sanderson book and as long as I rewrite the book in "my style" using a good chunk of his book as the script, then I can sell the movie without his permission, with a different name than the book, and without mentioning Sanderson at all until he threatens to sue me, and I'm forced to remake a third of my movie and put "based on the works of Brandon Sanderson" burred in the end credits.

If you are going to argue, please read more than the first two sentences of my comment. You might even be able to argue against the points I am actually making.

Can't you say the same on every youtuber that just goes into KF and copies popular posts to summarize a cow?

It actually reminds me of decent example. If someone just copypasted the OP of the Russell Greer thread? Sure, plagiarism. But take a look at "The World's Worst Paralegal: Russell Greer" by Ludwig World Order. Literally everything there is from KF. But it's not plagiarism. He added his own jokes, voice acted it, and narrated it in the form of humorous documentary. Give it a watch, it's actually full of effort. But you can't get that experience by simply reading the thread. He added on to it. I have some issues with it (the way he covers sagas made the timeline a bit confusing), but I have rewatched it a few times because it's just pretty damn entertaining.

 

[Smashed & Slamed]

Couldn't Internet Historian just strike a deal or collab or something to bring the article to life instead of stealing like a nigger so this imp kike slave couldn't get to dance around promoting his soros worship

>Striking a deal with the Tranny Chasing AIDS Br*t*sh Faggot
The best thing he can do is just ignore his ass.

 

[Cumulonimbus]

Is this not Disney's entire M.O?

Disney is the perfect example. Pinocchio is under creative commons. Anybody can make a Pinocchio movie. Just like how anyone can make media on the Kentucky cave guy.
But if my Pinocchio movie is a rip off of Disney's Pinocchio specifically, like copying their artstyle/music/structure for my movie then I am committing plagiarism.

Literally has fuck all to do with my comment, but okay.

If you are going to argue, please read more than the first two sentences of my comment. You might even be able to argue against the points I am actually making.

You made the argument that taking something written, and turning it into something watchable means it's no longer plagiarism. I responded by showing that isn't true using the book to movie analogy.
You're pretending I didn't make a point because you don't have a rebuttal.

 

[Übertroon]

You guys are operating on a 7th graders understanding of plagiarism where you just control C control V an entire article into an English paper.
Using your logic I can make a movie "based" on a Brandon Sanderson book and as long as I rewrite the book in "my style" using a good chunk of his book as the script, then I can sell the movie without his permission, with a different name than the book, and without mentioning Sanderson at all until he threatens to sue me, and I'm forced to remake a third of my movie and put "based on the works of Brandon Sanderson" burred in the end credits.
Right at the beginning of the bomber video he shows an example of plagiarism where an author tried to pitch his book to a media company exec. The exec turned it down then made a tv show ripping off his book, and the executive lied and pretended he never met with the author in the first place.

Shitty example, Sanderson writes fantasy shit. Floyd Collins is a real life person and no one has copyright to his story. This is like bitching that some comedian made a funny movie about Napoleon that borrowed details and lines from Schom's biography

 

[Cumulonimbus]

no one has copyright to his story.

Correct. No one has copyright to Pinocchio either. But Disney has a copyright on their media surrounding Pinocchio, just like how the Mental Floss author has copyright on his media surrounding Floyd Collins.
Internet historian didn't copy the story of Floyd Collins he copied the Mental Floss article written by another person. Which is plagiarism.

 

[Useful_Mistake]

You made the argument that taking something written, and turning it into something watchable means it's no longer plagiarism.

My point is that the original article is not a substitute of IH's video. You cannot get the same experience, and on top of that, IH's video has significantly more in it than the article itself. His video is not plagiarism.

 

[Sand Mega]

Will this drama amount to anything to either party, or will it be another retarded goose chase that will be forgotten next week?

 

[ENDTOPII]

>IH copied an article for his script

...yeah? He does that. He admits that he does that (for his secondary channels at least). He made it no secret that his video game story tellings are basically just what they saw during a watch of a YT letsplay with a splash of his own humor and editing style. The main channel benefits also from him animating the script. I thought that was just for second channel stuff, but not entirely surprised. Seems way overblown

His channel is really just taking something from the web and dramatize it with memes. That's it! So if his writers would follow this formula, this would pretty much be the result. Don't care tho, still the best quality shitpost youtuber.

 

[I_Lurk_Here]

I hate how fast this thread has gotten.

 

[Übertroon]

Correct. No one has copyright to Pinocchio either. But Disney has a copyright on their media surrounding Pinocchio, just like how the Mental Floss author has copyright on his media surrounding Floyd Collins.
Internet historian didn't copy the story of Floyd Collins he copied the Mental Floss article written by another person. Which is plagiarism.

Firstly Disney has only dared to fight people who've copied their art in the movie or their music. It's going to be difficult to convince someone it's plagiarised just because some sentences seem familiar.
Secondly it's going to be argued that whatever lines Internet Historian borrowed from an article on Floyd Collins is transformative.
Would you bet on a case where someone argued Gladiator from 2000 borrowed too many plot points and lines from The Fall of the Roman Empire from 1964?

 

[Spaceman Spud]

The real question of interest is what IH's regular guests will do.
Many of them share Hbombersoy's politics. Will they risk letting themselves be called nazi collaborators or will they throw their friend under the bus?

 

[Übertroon]

The real question of interest is what IH's regular guests will do.
Many of them share Hbombersoy's politics. Will they risk letting themselves be called nazi collaborators or will they throw their friend under the bus?

We'll have more IH and Jontron collabs, everyone wins

 

[Cumulonimbus]

My point is that the original article is not a substitute of IH's video. You cannot get the same experience, and on top of that, IH's video has significantly more in it than the article itself. His video is not plagiarism.

If IH made it clear from the beginning that the video was either a retelling of an article or using the article in the first place then it would be transformative similar to what react tubers make. But he didn't, he never credited the article until he got struck and he never makes it clear in the video that the parts in the video from the article aren't his. When he reads something from the article he doesn't show or tell that he got it from there and is quoting someone else. He just says it as if he wrote it. He copies the Hour by Hour structure of the story and the specific way the story is told/structured aswell.
Copying the way the Mental Floss author wrote his story, as well as not properly citing something you didn't write is plagiarism.

Would you bet on a case where someone argued Gladiator from 2000 borrowed too many plot points and lines from The Fall of the Roman Empire from 1964?

If the movie Gladiator intentionally copypasted lines from the 1964 script and/or ripped off the style, structure, or form of The Fall of the Roman Empire then yes that would be plagiarism.
Again, you can talk about the same stuff, but it needs to either be your original product or you need to make it clear when you quote someone else that it's not you who came up with the quote.
There's a difference between a comedian telling you a joke he stole vs saying "this reminds me of something Bill Burr said" and then telling the joke that Bill Burr said.

 

[Stab You in the Back]

If IH made it clear from the beginning that the video was either a retelling of an article or using the article in the first place then it would be transformative similar to what react tubers make.

First off, you're confusing "plagiarism" with copyright infringement. Which honestly doesn't surprise me because you're a dumbass.

Secondly, and more importantly, "citing your sources" is not a defense to copyright infringement. Its only a defense to plagiarism in school. You going there doesn't surprise me, because you have the understanding of a child. You know what would have happened to Ridley Scott if he put "based upon the book The Fall of the Roman Empire" in the credits of Gladiator? He would have been sued by the author of The Fall of the Roman Empire. And the biggest piece of evidence used in the court case would be that credit.

Holy shit you're dumb.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Another thing, the original article didn't have any sources listed as well besides books they recommend at the end.

 

[Pizdec]

This is retarded, because this is not at all relatable. If you wrote an article and I copy pasted it, sure, plagiarism. If I animated it, got VA done for it, changed it up a bit, and added my jokes in, it's not plagiarism, even if not linking (originally) the source is a shitty thing to do. You can think IH is a massive fag for what he did, fine, but stop using dishonest comparisons.

It's like people forget creative changes can make a work original. I mean Weird Al exists for God's sake.

 

[Serbian Peacekeepers]

Having watched the IH Segment of the video, my biggest issue was how Hbomber implied malice in situations where I think you can easily come up with Non-Malicious answers.
IH more than likely didn't outright say why the video was copystruck because it was a dealt with issue, both parties got what they wanted and that was that, no need to make a big stink out of a solved issue. The Idea he's purposely hiding what he did for some evil reason is pure conjecture and possibly slanderous.

I imagine IH will probably put out some response to what happened, though I doubt it will be a groveling apology like Hbomber wants.