There is a UA-camr called Adam Ragusea who does amazing videos on food science and history. He never fails to cite his sources and to post their links in the description, and very often he even directly invites the cited researcher on his show. Here's hoping more UA-camrs can learn from Adam
Thanks for mentioning his name, I checked a few of his video's, at least one guy who doesn't spread bullshit and tries to share objective informative content. As a dietitian, I liked that his content went to the main point of benefit and downsides of certain nutrition aspects.
Funny that you say this because he routinely spouts cooking myths, which is very out-of-character for him given what you mentioned. Example: he has, more than once, stated that "cast iron heats evenly," which is verifiably false with a quick Google search.
Putting citations in your video or in your video description, will not cost you anything and is a sign of good faith to the original authors and a sign of good quality work to your viewers.
I'm rewatching "The Kennedy Assassination: Inside the Book Depository," and the author puts a footnote number in the lower-right corner of the screen that ties to his source. Elegant and effective.
This is frustrating to see that one person is taking all the information's without giving citation but I do believe that you are capable of much more than this, so I would suggest you do not give him chance to ruin your hard work. Always a admirer of your work, Sir.
If you know anything about the topics Johnny Harris is talking, you know how many shady things he play with his video to manipulate his version of narrative, often far from facts
It's called journalism and opinion writing. It's not 'necessarily' meant to be factual and Johnny isnt necessarily right on everything, but it's opinion and i I dont think you understand that.
Look, as a researcher in learning/motivational theory, I understand your frustration. Journalists and public speakers will wrap our work in to an aesthetically pleasing package and present it to the general population to make huge profits. Let's be honest. There IS a lot of work goes into educating people on a topic in palatable way because us researchers are talking way above everyone's heads. We simply are not motivating people to engage with the content. Not to say I don't agree: he absolutely should be citing your work if he is using it. But we also need to work much much harder to connect with those around us who don't spend their time in overly elevated academic settings. Much love. I'd love to speak to anyone about this more.
fair point, but I just want to point out that most of the time journalists don’t make “huge profits“ it’s one of the worst-paid fields for the amount of work required.
Good luck suing someone for making a video using information that is in the public domain and adding commentary placing it under fair use. I honestly want to see how this goes over since every other case I’ve seen has ruled for fair use.
Didn't expect you here Nerdgasm. I've known you since building PC and sim racing days. Well put and seems like this UA-camr has some kind of bias probably because of his political stance. I'd be shocked if he wins the case. Johnny Harris is a very smart and informed person who could win without a lawyer.
Massive amount of respect for you, Tom. I've always wondered about the academics who build up the research and knowledge which UA-camrs and other content creators rely on but never seem to cite.
I'm subbed to this guy and I agree he's a great jorno but citing his sources would be a good idea . Even if he doesn't cite them in his story he can do it in the description. There is no excuse for someone this well educated and experienced who seems to find integrity so important not to cite his sources . But giving them a shout out in the story would be more of what I'd expect from him . I'm sad to see this
Yes… Not only giving credit bc it is owed (and should feel like a moral obligation!) but what about lifting up those who provided the information being used?? Harris could have linked this UA-cam channel in the description and shared the wealth by introducing his fan base (or at the very least the people who are specifically looking for info on the Chinese keyboard) to Tom’s channel!
Further to this i believe if johnny did get the idea from this guy he has no need to quote him. And if he did the guys channel would blow up. He sounds just jealous his story didn't trend and johnny's did.
I don't think this is a case of plagiarism because I think it was used more or less as explanatory material and in a educational environment to help the audience understand the topic and therefore, falls under fair use. With that being said, I also believe in citations to give credit where credit is owed because as you mentioned, people like yourself devote careers to this material.
Using explanatory material to explain something is not exactly transformative, which is the standard fair use is judged by. Not to mention that fair use is not really as expansive as youtubers would have you believe
@@DJDiarrhea, I'm rewriting my comment. My original comment basically just addressed your last point. Many UA-cam channels think that disclaimer in their description frees from liability. To clarify my original comment. I could have been a lot more clear. I think the video falls under education and the work was used as explanatory material to explain something where he could not.
Suggesting that Johnny give him half the revenue from Ads is ridiculous. So if he put a citation someplace, then you are going to sell lots of books? I don't think so.
@@travist2176 Citations is less for the popularity but more so as a credit that the sources of his videos should receive for doing the work and research. It would be like if you work at a company that delivers to customers and they have a problem with missing or destroyed boxes. So you research why that is happening. But then a co-worker takes all your research and gives an amazing presentation to the rest of the staff (without giving you credit) and gets a promotion
@@justalonetraveler2769 Except he isn't asking for just "credit" he is asking for money. He is a professor at Stanford, I think his work is in the public domain and he probably makes enough money
I've never heard of you until I read in Johnny Harris's comments about you. Which made me come and check you out, I like what I've seen and I'm now a subscriber.
There's something about that guy, I don't know if it's just me but virtually all of his videos including those on vox have am army of complaints, from misinformation to total rewrite of history. It's not a mistake at this point
You’re work is unique and provide tremendous insight for Chinese(me) and wide variety of researchers. When my friend send me this video, I quickly notice that it’s a small subset of your work, not to mention using Hangul image(which you are fluent) as Zhuyin which proves he has no idea what his doing. On the bright side, he has audiences, you have fans and bad hat😂 BTW I love your two books, it’s original and inspiring. Amazing work.
@@jacksevert3099 first of all ASEAN consist of South East asian nations like Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, etc. And not East Asian nations like South Korea. To answer your question, Vietnamese uses latin alphabet all together so they don't have problem with the key board. Korean only have a few abugida, the number of their abugida is less than English alphabet so no problem there on the key board.
@@isomarulor yeah Korean only has 24 characters which is similar to Roman alphabet. But Khmer in Cambodia has 71 and Japan has 74 I think so do they do same as Vietnam?
@@jacksevert3099 it's handled in different ways in Japan depending on the input method. There aren't actually all that many distinct kana (less than 50) so with modifier keys, you can comfortably write japanese using a keyboard, though at least in the west, the more common input method is to write in romaji and its automatically converted. So you write "ka" and it shows up as か.
Thanks for being reminded that he needs to include every resource as every proper scientific journalistic work should. I was so mesmerized by the work that Johnny do that I forgot that it was really important! If he can't put it on the video, he should put it in the description! Thanks a lot!
If the information was already made public good luck trying to sue, like there’s no rock hard proof that he stole your work sure he’s using your pictures but he could have got them from anywhere, but you are right he definitely should have sighted his sources especially with how in depth his videos are you’d think he would.
Why don't you email him and have it out with the fella. He probably uses a bunch of sources, many of which would have used you as a source. It's a tricky one, you can't credit every bit of information in your video. While you're obviously a prominent figure in the history and future of the Chinese keyboard, it's insane to think you're the only expert. Maybe he could list all the sources he uses in the description but he can't credit everyone. He's not citing his video as his own work, or his own research but he did put everything together. It would be like an airline accident UA-camr citing every person who complied the accident report the UA-camr got their information from. Should they also credit the person who invented the engine, did the research on aerodynamics or the person who designed the instrument that led to the accident? They'd be there forever. There's also a bunch of other stuff he would have mentioned in there that had nothing to do with you. I agree, sources should be noted but only where relevant. It's insane to think no one else wrote an article or did continued research on your 2016 talk that he would have come across and used for his information. I highly doubt he just watched that talk and used the information without standing up by using other sources with similar information in it. That's how journalism works.
I think is because Johnny doesn't work for vox anymore and he does all the job of a huge team of editors who correct his scripts and fact check, and people who prepares every detail of every documentaries. That's maybe why the quality of his content took a hit. The research and the amount of time and detail is not that good anymore. I have seen many people being mad at him for not doing research properly on a subject or not being objective, like his content is not as curated as it usted to be
Yeah he’s been wrong about the Chinese language, among other things. He said something like each Chinese character is a word, or something like that, which isn’t true, at least not on their own they’re not all words.
@@DengueBurgerEach chinese character is a word. They each carry meaning, but also create meaning when paired tgt or put in sentences. I know this because I speak Putonghua and Cantonese as well as write in Chinese characters too. So he was correct about that part, maybe not the others though.
@@hilaryone2213 carrying meaning and being a word are two different things, what word is 們? a word is a specific set of one or more morphemes that can be used freely, every character is a morpheme, but not every character is a word
curious tbh if you ever messaged him, as i myself love johnny harris but have a hard time with the fact he doesnt cite his sources and i do my own resource and find the info eventually but it doesnt inventivize much of faith on the long haul
Sadly, this is the type of people who will say things like "5 reasons why you shouldn't go to college," "why your history degree sucks." Their understanding of how ideas work is guided by "information is free." This is just one of the reasons why college in general and the humanities in particular are of the essence today.
Hello sir, thank you, first of all, for your career and research. Second, I am a huge Johnny Harris fan, but this is a really bad move on his part that does not really contribute or collaborate well with smaller creators.
Glad you're not going to sue and I loved the point your video made, but idk how i feel about the title since it could be considered "clickbait". Then again, it kind of pales in comparison to what Johnny did and I say that as a big fan of his 🤔
Everyone else has already said it, but yes, acknowledging sources is just basic. What he did may not count as full-on plagiarism since material was not repeated verbatim, but you certainly played a big part in the availability of the information he used. I hope he takes the lesson from this.
I think you acted very polite and I totally support you in this case. Johnny Harris make cool videos, but this lack of reference/citations can be bad even for himself.
You donated images to a university and then someone used those images in a video. Once you donate something, it's not yours anymore. You gave a gift to a university. That gift has disseminated. That was the crime? He is a professional journalist. He totally raised awareness of your work. I think that rising tide should be able to float your boat as well. Where did he get those images? Did the university release them? I think you should be able to monetize this, if indirectly. Thanks to that clickbait title, maybe you already have.
Also, Johnny never claims to have made up this or came up any idea. He says he is so well versed because he listens to so many audio books. Then he creates videos about things he finds interesting. This has to be clickbait.... either that or this guy is ridiculously stupid.
Wow this guy is the only person in the world who knows how Chinese characters work with keyboards. I wouldve thought the field had more depth but hey you live and you learn. There is only one expert in this field in the entire world.
this is UA-cam not a scientific journal. He has no obligation to cite sources. This man only has a problem with it because he wants recognition for his work. He should just be happy that his work is being used to educate people, period.
@@alec6583 do you have any valid reasoning behind your opinion? Or do you just result to insults when you disagree with someone? Personally, I'm more interested in having a productive back and forth, however, I do realize this is a youtube comment section. Oh and what do you mean by my "2 months of time out" ?
@@jakefromstate907 You went 2 months without any further action on your comment. It was a joke. Whatever. This guy led the specific research that Johnny went off of. Johnny Harris is a reputed journalist, so he _obviously_ should know better than to leave sources un-cited. This guy is no-shit, actually the biggest specialist on the subject and Johnny Harris (unwittingly???) quoted him word-for-word a couple times in his video, as is illustrated in this video. For you to boil it down to this guy attempting to "have a monopoly on information" illustrates that you have no fucking idea what this video is about. The fact is, Johnny did his research. He used this guy's work, which is fine. We're in the clear so far. Still with me? Okay, then Johnny _omitted his credit_ when he published the video. It's a big, big, *big* fucking no-no in the journalism game to make such a fuck-up.
@@alec6583 oh sorry I didn't understand your joke, I dont usually get such dry hummor in a reply. Anyway, what you fail to realize is that Johnny Harris did not publish his research in any kind of academic journal, nor did he write an article in a magazine, newspaper, or in any other journalistic format. He simply made a youtube video with publicly available information. He did not claim to be the source of said information, he simply repeated the information. So to claim that Johnny Harris is somehow stealing or plagiarizing another's work is absolutely false and potentially misleading. I want to note that I'm not defending Johnny Harris because I have some kind of bias towards him, I've barely watched any of his videos... The fact that this guy thinks he has some kind of legal case against him is utterly ridiculous. Nobody, whether they're a journalist or not, has a duty to cite any peice of information that they regurgitate to the world, unless they are presenting that information in a formal way. UA-cam is not formal, it's more of a casual setting. I do see where you're coming from, however, I don't agree because I don't think that people have a duty to cite every piece of research they did for a youtube video. Anyway, I respect your opinion, maybe next time we can have a civil discussion? Without all the insults? I don't know, I just feel like that usually leads to a more productive conversation. You see, I'm open to hearing new ideas and maybe even adjusting my opinions based on those ideas. I don't need to result to baseless insults in an attempt to assert my dominance. seems like something you're not too familiar with, maybe you should work on that.
That’s very gracious of you. I don’t get why he didn’t mentioned sources. And, something I like about good journalists is when they bring people closer to the experts. JH recent videos are getting sloppy.
Dude makes beautiful documentary’s to say that his videos are “sloppy” is just simply inaccurate but compared to his other works I see where your coming from.
The question is if he is helping you or steeling from you? I would have never found your channel if it wasn't for John Harris. Although he didn't show the sources, which he could have, I still found you because he triggered the interest for this topic. Great work by the way. Greetings from the Netherlands
Never in the video does Johnny present this information as his own. He is only trying to share interesting information. I think this is your attempt to start drama and to insert yourself in to a non-existent problem for views and clout. Someone who did not watch to the end of the video might think what I said above so please don’t clickbate like that.
I was hoping that by now (9 months later) there would be a pinned comment saying something to the effect of: “Johnny reached out and made amends and bought a bunch of copies...etc.” Guess not. *sigh*
Johnny Harris should stop calling his “news” for news since 1. The research he does isn’t new and happened for long ago. 2. He only shows his opinion on it on what is “right” or “wrong” based on his pick of side in the research, and twists and cherry-picks the parts he likes the best and leaves out the rest
I love Johnny Harris, he is doing great documentaries and visual investigations, but there is no argument for bad or missing citation. As boring as it is (at least to me - not a journalist) it`s part of your job (if you are).
@Ma1ne2 I understand why his videos are so entertaining but the fact of the matter is, it is bad Historical Work. Citation is a huge problem for him but also using inductive reasoning. A historian should look at the primary sources and then write the history, not write the history and then find sources that back up his claim.
I don't necessarily disagree with him on some of his points. As someone who's life has been devoted to historical work, I find his stuff to be at worst blatant propaganda and at best half-truths. Especially his, how America stole series which takes in bad context from the era.
Obviously I know it was a joke and all but in all seriousness johnny has absolutely no legal obligation to cite you or your work, the research I assume is all public and his work was transformative
I am surprised he does not cite his sources… I am sure he knows better. I loved the juxtaposition of the uncomfortably aggressive tone at the begin followed by the light hearted veracity at the end. Nicely done! I have a question… if he would have cited his resources, and presumably used your research, would you have legal grounds to sue for ad revenues?
This is not a plagiarism. He did not say that this is my research and research is always open and available to everyone. You can find a link in the description below the video.
So.... don't take this the wrong way; I absolutely agree that citations should be sourced, although, having not read your books, nor your packet, yet, I really have no way of verifying your plagiarism claim shy of either, A. buying your source material, or B. taking your word for it. The problem here is that public information is just that: public. Unless you can provide supporting evidence that he used your source material word for word, or stole IP from you (and sorry, a single photo donated into the public domain IS fair use), asserting that Harris stole from you is a nebulous, quasi-supportable claim at best. I mean, I'm a web software engineer. I've written a book on website development and maintain a couple open source programs and have several published NPM packages. YOU put up a website. Ipso facto... But following that line... I only found your yourtube channel because I'm a subscriber of Harris's and I recognized his name in your thumbnail. Moreover, you're gathering leads on your website. This means in BOTH capacities you're leveraging someone else's fame and renown (with a healthy layer of clickbaity sensationalism) to increase your own view count, sub count, and directly-monetizable mailing list, whether it's your intention or not. To be perfectly frank, I really see a dubious IP claim on public domain data as not all that dissimilar to name dropping a public figure in the hopes of driving traffic. Indeed, since you're actually name dropping, you open yourself up to both slander and libel suits, should your assertions damage Harris's profitability, unless you can bring to bear irrefutable evidence you WERE plagiarized (like it or agree with it or not, one must concede that the burden of proof in a court of law in as case like this DOES lie with the accuser). There was a video a few months back titled "Can the Lock Picking Lawyer be Trusted!?" or somesuch being put out a no-name putz who nevertheless DID garner quite a few new subs and views from that alone (anyone reading this, I'll save you the trip: dude had bought a trailer hitch lock that LPL said was legit. After 15 minutes of him going on about the lock, it was revealed: yes. Yes, he believes LPL CAN be trusted. No affiliation or connection that I saw other than "he watched one of LPL's vids). All that having been said: DID Johnny rip you off word for word? What of the data he presented did you have exclusive domain over? Did he give you license to use his likeness and name? Yes, this application IS covered under Fair Use/Criticism/Review, but it's going to be a steep climb up a slippery slope to assert the one and ignore the other. Remember: I'm NOT saying youre wrong or that I agree with the policy or scenario or laws in this case... only that I think you're actually on shakier legal ground than he is, and you may wish to consider exercising caution about claims directly addressing/accusing someone by their highly-visible identity. I mean, hell: the ENTIRE SCIENTIFIC and ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES are built by people reading and interpreting/interpolating other people's data. ...although, admittedly: They're usually pretty good at citations.
All of this is right. If Johnny Harris wants to revisit his citation practices, the only reason for that would be as a way of bolstering his own credibility. Not as a way of avoiding a lawsuit. For which there are precisely zero grounds. That's just not the way science, history, research, or journalism work.
i mean yeah dude, go get ur money. i like Johnny Harris but if you've worked this a good chunk of your life, then for sure dude he should've given u credit cause tbh i've never heard of you before until this video. i noticed that u made this vid a year ago; did u end up getting ur money, either from ur deal with him or did u sue lol??
I really do not think that he used anything of yours, knowingly, or did so without listing sources. He is always very diligent about his sources from everything I have read and heard. it may not be the case with your work here however, sometimes things like this are down to multiple discovery or what’s also known as simultaneous invention. Also, if you could get a message to Johnny to speak to him he would probably take down anything that lacks proper sourcing. Just my two cents
I was watching Johnny's videos, and yours was the second video suggestion. I don't know if he ever bought a book, split the ad revenue, or gave you some credit later on, but at least you got me subscribed.
Imagine the trouble all college students would have just for not making their correct references and citations in their essays and video essays, or even imagine a world where every tiktok / reels / short creator would have to go through legal disputes in their Did you know videos, cuz they didn’t put their source in the description. This is delusional, specially cuz all of this if done right like Johny Harrys video would be fair use. This guy is just mad a popular video didnt cite his book, losing potential sales. So this is not about having proper references but rather missed sales.
I've always been fascinated by Johnny (similar background and internship experiences), but his work lately leans toward sensationalism and ignores complexity in geopolitics with broad strokes. There's always the "accessibility to novices" versus academic rigor. But his recent videos, plus this borderline plagiarism, doesn't bode well. In any classroom, not citing sources means plagiarism. Same standards should be applied, imo
I didnt even know wow! His video are great don't get me wrong, but man worked for 15 YEARS? and someone else used the work WITHOUT permission? omg, 15 years man, that's crazy he should write sources wow (I came from "How Johnny Harris Rewrites History" btw)
I get his point. When you have worked for something tirelessly and are passionate, it's okay for other people to use it but it feels like you are being ignored if not cited. Speaking from personal experience 😅😅
Apple also didn’t invent most of the stuff that is in iPhone. I guess it was better packaged and visualized, “popularized”for big audiences. Can’t say though about the “plagiarism” or copyright things, however would be great to show of course respect for your long research work.
Harris is rigorous and professional in his work and I appreciate that you agree with it. There must be a reason for not citing some sources, but I don't think it's illegal, maybe unethical for a research paper. But is it for a journalistic style video? Did he actually ask you and then not cite you? If he didn't I don't see the problem unless he explicitly didn't do it for a specific reason.
The only reason why I like this video is the ending. You realized that information, even though you're the expert on it, does not belong to you. You also "stole" it, rather compiled it, from the Chinese inventors. I do agree you should be quoted and given the appropriate credit for your work. I would really much appreciate a video or a post from Johnny on this. But other than that he does not owe you anything by my book. I would also probably donate a percentage 5/10% of the revenue to support the benefits that your research brought to him. It's only fair
While the frustration is understandable and the critique itself very much justified (I can't remember the first time this point came up in regards to his videos, but it has been an issue for a while imo.). I don't see on which basis you would possibly be able to sue him on this. "dick move, intentional or not" isn't legal basis. He has no obligation to cite any sources by law and making a product / profits based on prior research isn't illegal either. Yes, It'd be great if everyone acted like Ragusea (I saw his name mentioned in the top comment) but thats a high bar and a matter of personal ethics... I do believe by now he got the point after his last shitstorm on that topic but either way, just cause something may not feel fair, it doesnt mean you got basis for legal actions or are owed anything. (This is based on my rudimentary understanding of your legal system, I know it wouldnt even get to court here in Europe though)
Love this. Wonder-twin powers activate! Form of "a deeper dive..." Shape of "...a collaboration between two interesting skilled individuals attended by an audience of interested us-es."
But the fact is still, is that you probably didn’t reach so many people as him. Maybe you should collaborate with him instead of thinking about money in the bank stuff. The research you have done is tremendous ofcourse and he should cite you on this. The key with research is that eventually your research reaches alot of people that can learn from it. If you can’t do it yourself do it with johnny, vox or other youtube journalist. Thats my 2 cents.
NOT kewl what he did, period. You should have been cited at the beginning, your book given a shout out for more details,etc. Contact him, explain your position so he can do right by you. If no response, take the next step. Good luck Prof!
My suggestion would be that you hit him up personally and ask him to edit the description and credits to show your work credit. As for financially? Nah leave it alone especially if he's cool about it and willing to sight the source.
There is a UA-camr called Adam Ragusea who does amazing videos on food science and history. He never fails to cite his sources and to post their links in the description, and very often he even directly invites the cited researcher on his show. Here's hoping more UA-camrs can learn from Adam
Thanks for mentioning his name, I checked a few of his video's, at least one guy who doesn't spread bullshit and tries to share objective informative content. As a dietitian, I liked that his content went to the main point of benefit and downsides of certain nutrition aspects.
Funny that you say this because he routinely spouts cooking myths, which is very out-of-character for him given what you mentioned. Example: he has, more than once, stated that "cast iron heats evenly," which is verifiably false with a quick Google search.
@@Swift016 the thing about him is that if you pointed that out in his comments and he saw it he would make an entire video explaining how he was wrong
I love Adam.
Didn’t know he had a UA-cam. Adam literally hosted a show teaching journalists to do journalism. Seriously - and that’s where I know him from.
Putting citations in your video or in your video description, will not cost you anything and is a sign of good faith to the original authors and a sign of good quality work to your viewers.
Split it.
I'm rewatching "The Kennedy Assassination: Inside the Book Depository," and the author puts a footnote number in the lower-right corner of the screen that ties to his source. Elegant and effective.
This is frustrating to see that one person is taking all the information's without giving citation but I do believe that you are capable of much more than this, so I would suggest you do not give him chance to ruin your hard work. Always a admirer of your work, Sir.
How did other ASEAN nations and their complex languages tackle this problem? Like Indian, Vietnamese, Korean etc... did they all copy?
@@jacksevert3099 no hindi has 52 letters, it fits onto keybord.
@@mephisto4618 most indians just type in english anyways.
If you know anything about the topics Johnny Harris is talking, you know how many shady things he play with his video to manipulate his version of narrative, often far from facts
It's called journalism and opinion writing. It's not 'necessarily' meant to be factual and Johnny isnt necessarily right on everything, but it's opinion and i I dont think you understand that.
Look, as a researcher in learning/motivational theory, I understand your frustration. Journalists and public speakers will wrap our work in to an aesthetically pleasing package and present it to the general population to make huge profits. Let's be honest. There IS a lot of work goes into educating people on a topic in palatable way because us researchers are talking way above everyone's heads. We simply are not motivating people to engage with the content. Not to say I don't agree: he absolutely should be citing your work if he is using it. But we also need to work much much harder to connect with those around us who don't spend their time in overly elevated academic settings. Much love. I'd love to speak to anyone about this more.
fair point, but I just want to point out that most of the time journalists don’t make “huge profits“ it’s one of the worst-paid fields for the amount of work required.
Good luck suing someone for making a video using information that is in the public domain and adding commentary placing it under fair use. I honestly want to see how this goes over since every other case I’ve seen has ruled for fair use.
yeah, that's what i think.
Fair use isn't as expansive as you might think.
@@DJDiarrhea is the video educational? Is Johnny Harris subject to Fair Use Laws? If both are yes, it likely applies.
@@DJDiarrhea This has fair use written all over it. Source: I work in educational publishing
Didn't expect you here Nerdgasm. I've known you since building PC and sim racing days. Well put and seems like this UA-camr has some kind of bias probably because of his political stance. I'd be shocked if he wins the case. Johnny Harris is a very smart and informed person who could win without a lawyer.
Massive amount of respect for you, Tom. I've always wondered about the academics who build up the research and knowledge which UA-camrs and other content creators rely on but never seem to cite.
I'm subbed to this guy and I agree he's a great jorno but citing his sources would be a good idea . Even if he doesn't cite them in his story he can do it in the description. There is no excuse for someone this well educated and experienced who seems to find integrity so important not to cite his sources .
But giving them a shout out in the story would be more of what I'd expect from him . I'm sad to see this
Yes… Not only giving credit bc it is owed (and should feel like a moral obligation!) but what about lifting up those who provided the information being used?? Harris could have linked this UA-cam channel in the description and shared the wealth by introducing his fan base (or at the very least the people who are specifically looking for info on the Chinese keyboard) to Tom’s channel!
Further to this i believe if johnny did get the idea from this guy he has no need to quote him. And if he did the guys channel would blow up. He sounds just jealous his story didn't trend and johnny's did.
no,,, you don't need to cite sources for 1+1=2 .
He’s an awful journalist
@@robert9016 he isn't a journalist.
I don't think this is a case of plagiarism because I think it was used more or less as explanatory material and in a educational environment to help the audience understand the topic and therefore, falls under fair use. With that being said, I also believe in citations to give credit where credit is owed because as you mentioned, people like yourself devote careers to this material.
Using explanatory material to explain something is not exactly transformative, which is the standard fair use is judged by. Not to mention that fair use is not really as expansive as youtubers would have you believe
@@DJDiarrhea, I'm rewriting my comment. My original comment basically just addressed your last point. Many UA-cam channels think that disclaimer in their description frees from liability.
To clarify my original comment. I could have been a lot more clear. I think the video falls under education and the work was used as explanatory material to explain something where he could not.
Suggesting that Johnny give him half the revenue from Ads is ridiculous. So if he put a citation someplace, then you are going to sell lots of books? I don't think so.
@@travist2176 Citations is less for the popularity but more so as a credit that the sources of his videos should receive for doing the work and research. It would be like if you work at a company that delivers to customers and they have a problem with missing or destroyed boxes. So you research why that is happening. But then a co-worker takes all your research and gives an amazing presentation to the rest of the staff (without giving you credit) and gets a promotion
@@justalonetraveler2769 Except he isn't asking for just "credit" he is asking for money. He is a professor at Stanford, I think his work is in the public domain and he probably makes enough money
I've never heard of you until I read in Johnny Harris's comments about you. Which made me come and check you out, I like what I've seen and I'm now a subscriber.
Just message him instead. Hope you guys work it out.
That's exactly what this video is.
@@hundvd_7 It's more like an open letter. Not personal correspondence.
You do realize it's hard to get in touch with people that have millions of followers, right? This is much more likely to catch his attention and ours.
Ah yes like wouldn't have thought of that. Maybe johnny bravo could've done that before stealing shit
It's 2022, and he still fails to credit the work of others, and now he is even going more and more into spreading false information.
Yeah,all he does when he gets busted is simply apologizing,but later on he just makes the same mistake over and over without any remorse
There's something about that guy, I don't know if it's just me but virtually all of his videos including those on vox have am army of complaints, from misinformation to total rewrite of history. It's not a mistake at this point
I don't think knowledge can be copyrighted
You’re work is unique and provide tremendous insight for Chinese(me) and wide variety of researchers. When my friend send me this video, I quickly notice that it’s a small subset of your work, not to mention using Hangul image(which you are fluent) as Zhuyin which proves he has no idea what his doing.
On the bright side, he has audiences, you have fans and bad hat😂
BTW I love your two books, it’s original and inspiring. Amazing work.
Do you know how other ASEAN nations and their complex languages tackle this problem? Like India, Vietnam, Korea etc... did they all copy China?
@@jacksevert3099 ^
@@jacksevert3099 first of all ASEAN consist of South East asian nations like Thailand, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, etc. And not East Asian nations like South Korea. To answer your question, Vietnamese uses latin alphabet all together so they don't have problem with the key board. Korean only have a few abugida, the number of their abugida is less than English alphabet so no problem there on the key board.
@@isomarulor yeah Korean only has 24 characters which is similar to Roman alphabet. But Khmer in Cambodia has 71 and Japan has 74 I think so do they do same as Vietnam?
@@jacksevert3099 it's handled in different ways in Japan depending on the input method. There aren't actually all that many distinct kana (less than 50) so with modifier keys, you can comfortably write japanese using a keyboard, though at least in the west, the more common input method is to write in romaji and its automatically converted. So you write "ka" and it shows up as か.
Does anyone know if Johnny responded in anyway to this?
Thanks for being reminded that he needs to include every resource as every proper scientific journalistic work should.
I was so mesmerized by the work that Johnny do that I forgot that it was really important! If he can't put it on the video, he should put it in the description! Thanks a lot!
If the information was already made public good luck trying to sue, like there’s no rock hard proof that he stole your work sure he’s using your pictures but he could have got them from anywhere, but you are right he definitely should have sighted his sources especially with how in depth his videos are you’d think he would.
This was a prank. Watch till the end.
A lot of his videos on US imperialism pull directly from Daniel Immerwahr who’s at Northwestern
so did harris contact you?
So this is where all the dislikers came from.. Capitalism at finest
Lol yeah I was wondering why so many people would dislike a good video. This man has a point tho
Why don't you email him and have it out with the fella. He probably uses a bunch of sources, many of which would have used you as a source. It's a tricky one, you can't credit every bit of information in your video. While you're obviously a prominent figure in the history and future of the Chinese keyboard, it's insane to think you're the only expert. Maybe he could list all the sources he uses in the description but he can't credit everyone. He's not citing his video as his own work, or his own research but he did put everything together. It would be like an airline accident UA-camr citing every person who complied the accident report the UA-camr got their information from. Should they also credit the person who invented the engine, did the research on aerodynamics or the person who designed the instrument that led to the accident? They'd be there forever. There's also a bunch of other stuff he would have mentioned in there that had nothing to do with you. I agree, sources should be noted but only where relevant. It's insane to think no one else wrote an article or did continued research on your 2016 talk that he would have come across and used for his information. I highly doubt he just watched that talk and used the information without standing up by using other sources with similar information in it. That's how journalism works.
I think is because Johnny doesn't work for vox anymore and he does all the job of a huge team of editors who correct his scripts and fact check, and people who prepares every detail of every documentaries. That's maybe why the quality of his content took a hit. The research and the amount of time and detail is not that good anymore. I have seen many people being mad at him for not doing research properly on a subject or not being objective, like his content is not as curated as it usted to be
Yeah he’s been wrong about the Chinese language, among other things.
He said something like each Chinese character is a word, or something like that, which isn’t true, at least not on their own they’re not all words.
Meh, if college students doing a report can cite their sources. A professional journalist certainly can.
@@DengueBurgerEach chinese character is a word. They each carry meaning, but also create meaning when paired tgt or put in sentences. I know this because I speak Putonghua and Cantonese as well as write in Chinese characters too. So he was correct about that part, maybe not the others though.
He’s such a beta male. Christ.
@@hilaryone2213 carrying meaning and being a word are two different things, what word is 們? a word is a specific set of one or more morphemes that can be used freely, every character is a morpheme, but not every character is a word
curious tbh if you ever messaged him, as i myself love johnny harris but have a hard time with the fact he doesnt cite his sources and i do my own resource and find the info eventually but it doesnt inventivize much of faith on the long haul
Sadly, this is the type of people who will say things like "5 reasons why you shouldn't go to college," "why your history degree sucks." Their understanding of how ideas work is guided by "information is free." This is just one of the reasons why college in general and the humanities in particular are of the essence today.
@@htoodoh5770 I absolutely agree...citing your sources is also free.
so true@@cat-le1hf
Any update on this?
Hello sir, thank you, first of all, for your career and research. Second, I am a huge Johnny Harris fan, but this is a really bad move on his part that does not really contribute or collaborate well with smaller creators.
Sorry you weren't given credit Tom. Dropping your UA-cam in as many threads and shares of his vid that I see. You a real one
Yes please
Glad you're not going to sue and I loved the point your video made, but idk how i feel about the title since it could be considered "clickbait". Then again, it kind of pales in comparison to what Johnny did and I say that as a big fan of his 🤔
I just saw this, I womder if this issue was ever resolved and if Johnny Harris responded
Coming across this months later, but did anything come of this? I don't see any updated on that video, or his channel, regarding any attribution.
If u sue him I sue you
Everyone else has already said it, but yes, acknowledging sources is just basic. What he did may not count as full-on plagiarism since material was not repeated verbatim, but you certainly played a big part in the availability of the information he used. I hope he takes the lesson from this.
Plagiarism is not just repeating "verbatim", it's also copying ideas and discoveries in general
I think you acted very polite and I totally support you in this case. Johnny Harris make cool videos, but this lack of reference/citations can be bad even for himself.
You donated images to a university and then someone used those images in a video.
Once you donate something, it's not yours anymore. You gave a gift to a university. That gift has disseminated.
That was the crime?
He is a professional journalist. He totally raised awareness of your work. I think that rising tide should be able to float your boat as well.
Where did he get those images? Did the university release them?
I think you should be able to monetize this, if indirectly. Thanks to that clickbait title, maybe you already have.
Also, Johnny never claims to have made up this or came up any idea. He says he is so well versed because he listens to so many audio books. Then he creates videos about things he finds interesting.
This has to be clickbait.... either that or this guy is ridiculously stupid.
Wow this guy is the only person in the world who knows how Chinese characters work with keyboards. I wouldve thought the field had more depth but hey you live and you learn. There is only one expert in this field in the entire world.
You’re wrong. That hat is bomb and I would part with good money for it. (Keep up the good work, prof!)
Where is your citation for using that clip from Anchorman?
This dude is ridiculous. You don't have a monopoly on information.
this is UA-cam not a scientific journal. He has no obligation to cite sources. This man only has a problem with it because he wants recognition for his work. He should just be happy that his work is being used to educate people, period.
@@jakefromstate907 That's a completely idiotic take and I hope your 2 months of time-out have served you well.
@@alec6583 do you have any valid reasoning behind your opinion? Or do you just result to insults when you disagree with someone? Personally, I'm more interested in having a productive back and forth, however, I do realize this is a youtube comment section. Oh and what do you mean by my "2 months of time out" ?
@@jakefromstate907 You went 2 months without any further action on your comment. It was a joke. Whatever.
This guy led the specific research that Johnny went off of. Johnny Harris is a reputed journalist, so he _obviously_ should know better than to leave sources un-cited. This guy is no-shit, actually the biggest specialist on the subject and Johnny Harris (unwittingly???) quoted him word-for-word a couple times in his video, as is illustrated in this video. For you to boil it down to this guy attempting to "have a monopoly on information" illustrates that you have no fucking idea what this video is about. The fact is, Johnny did his research. He used this guy's work, which is fine. We're in the clear so far. Still with me? Okay, then Johnny _omitted his credit_ when he published the video. It's a big, big, *big* fucking no-no in the journalism game to make such a fuck-up.
@@alec6583 oh sorry I didn't understand your joke, I dont usually get such dry hummor in a reply. Anyway, what you fail to realize is that Johnny Harris did not publish his research in any kind of academic journal, nor did he write an article in a magazine, newspaper, or in any other journalistic format. He simply made a youtube video with publicly available information. He did not claim to be the source of said information, he simply repeated the information. So to claim that Johnny Harris is somehow stealing or plagiarizing another's work is absolutely false and potentially misleading. I want to note that I'm not defending Johnny Harris because I have some kind of bias towards him, I've barely watched any of his videos... The fact that this guy thinks he has some kind of legal case against him is utterly ridiculous. Nobody, whether they're a journalist or not, has a duty to cite any peice of information that they regurgitate to the world, unless they are presenting that information in a formal way. UA-cam is not formal, it's more of a casual setting. I do see where you're coming from, however, I don't agree because I don't think that people have a duty to cite every piece of research they did for a youtube video. Anyway, I respect your opinion, maybe next time we can have a civil discussion? Without all the insults? I don't know, I just feel like that usually leads to a more productive conversation. You see, I'm open to hearing new ideas and maybe even adjusting my opinions based on those ideas. I don't need to result to baseless insults in an attempt to assert my dominance. seems like something you're not too familiar with, maybe you should work on that.
That’s very gracious of you. I don’t get why he didn’t mentioned sources. And, something I like about good journalists is when they bring people closer to the experts. JH recent videos are getting sloppy.
Naah
Dude makes beautiful documentary’s to say that his videos are “sloppy” is just simply inaccurate but compared to his other works I see where your coming from.
This is what happens when you skip University Plagarism and start to travel
No he has enough University to know about this, it's day 1 you learn about citing your sources
So did Johnny ever got back to you?
The question is if he is helping you or steeling from you? I would have never found your channel if it wasn't for John Harris. Although he didn't show the sources, which he could have, I still found you because he triggered the interest for this topic. Great work by the way. Greetings from the Netherlands
Someone who plans their day based on the air quality index..... this is the type of guy who sues someone for getting a popular video on his topic
Never in the video does Johnny present this information as his own. He is only trying to share interesting information. I think this is your attempt to start drama and to insert yourself in to a non-existent problem for views and clout. Someone who did not watch to the end of the video might think what I said above so please don’t clickbate like that.
I was hoping that by now (9 months later) there would be a pinned comment saying something to the effect of: “Johnny reached out and made amends and bought a bunch of copies...etc.”
Guess not. *sigh*
Johnny Harris should stop calling his “news” for news since 1. The research he does isn’t new and happened for long ago. 2. He only shows his opinion on it on what is “right” or “wrong” based on his pick of side in the research, and twists and cherry-picks the parts he likes the best and leaves out the rest
You don't even deserve to sue the ant who eat your sugar
I love Johnny Harris, he is doing great documentaries and visual investigations, but there is no argument for bad or missing citation. As boring as it is (at least to me - not a journalist) it`s part of your job (if you are).
Johnny Harris is a problem because of the way he always simplifies History and he is so often biased.
@Ma1ne2 I understand why his videos are so entertaining but the fact of the matter is, it is bad Historical Work. Citation is a huge problem for him but also using inductive reasoning. A historian should look at the primary sources and then write the history, not write the history and then find sources that back up his claim.
I don't necessarily disagree with him on some of his points. As someone who's life has been devoted to historical work, I find his stuff to be at worst blatant propaganda and at best half-truths. Especially his, how America stole series which takes in bad context from the era.
Sue, yes
Obviously I know it was a joke and all but in all seriousness johnny has absolutely no legal obligation to cite you or your work, the research I assume is all public and his work was transformative
The UA-cam algo suggested this to me so this is my comment to help a smaller channel grow.
Also, I loved this video.
I don´t really think he is going to sue... however it does shine the light on what changes should be made between creators ... be better.
If it wasn't for johnny, i wouldn't met you , information is for everybody.
Well I mean, I don't like Harris so much but you don't have copyrights for facts. What are we talking about?
he also showed Hangul when saying Taiwanese letters lol no idea of Asia whatsoever
You just gained a new sub. You guys should collaborate. He should cite you as a source. That is all.
I am surprised he does not cite his sources… I am sure he knows better. I loved the juxtaposition of the uncomfortably aggressive tone at the begin followed by the light hearted veracity at the end. Nicely done!
I have a question… if he would have cited his resources, and presumably used your research, would you have legal grounds to sue for ad revenues?
That's super angering -- I'm so sorry Johnny did that!
This is not a plagiarism. He did not say that this is my research and research is always open and available to everyone. You can find a link in the description below the video.
So.... don't take this the wrong way; I absolutely agree that citations should be sourced, although, having not read your books, nor your packet, yet, I really have no way of verifying your plagiarism claim shy of either, A. buying your source material, or B. taking your word for it.
The problem here is that public information is just that: public. Unless you can provide supporting evidence that he used your source material word for word, or stole IP from you (and sorry, a single photo donated into the public domain IS fair use), asserting that Harris stole from you is a nebulous, quasi-supportable claim at best. I mean, I'm a web software engineer. I've written a book on website development and maintain a couple open source programs and have several published NPM packages. YOU put up a website. Ipso facto...
But following that line... I only found your yourtube channel because I'm a subscriber of Harris's and I recognized his name in your thumbnail. Moreover, you're gathering leads on your website. This means in BOTH capacities you're leveraging someone else's fame and renown (with a healthy layer of clickbaity sensationalism) to increase your own view count, sub count, and directly-monetizable mailing list, whether it's your intention or not. To be perfectly frank, I really see a dubious IP claim on public domain data as not all that dissimilar to name dropping a public figure in the hopes of driving traffic. Indeed, since you're actually name dropping, you open yourself up to both slander and libel suits, should your assertions damage Harris's profitability, unless you can bring to bear irrefutable evidence you WERE plagiarized (like it or agree with it or not, one must concede that the burden of proof in a court of law in as case like this DOES lie with the accuser).
There was a video a few months back titled "Can the Lock Picking Lawyer be Trusted!?" or somesuch being put out a no-name putz who nevertheless DID garner quite a few new subs and views from that alone (anyone reading this, I'll save you the trip: dude had bought a trailer hitch lock that LPL said was legit. After 15 minutes of him going on about the lock, it was revealed: yes. Yes, he believes LPL CAN be trusted. No affiliation or connection that I saw other than "he watched one of LPL's vids).
All that having been said: DID Johnny rip you off word for word? What of the data he presented did you have exclusive domain over? Did he give you license to use his likeness and name? Yes, this application IS covered under Fair Use/Criticism/Review, but it's going to be a steep climb up a slippery slope to assert the one and ignore the other. Remember: I'm NOT saying youre wrong or that I agree with the policy or scenario or laws in this case... only that I think you're actually on shakier legal ground than he is, and you may wish to consider exercising caution about claims directly addressing/accusing someone by their highly-visible identity.
I mean, hell: the ENTIRE SCIENTIFIC and ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES are built by people reading and interpreting/interpolating other people's data. ...although, admittedly: They're usually pretty good at citations.
All of this is right. If Johnny Harris wants to revisit his citation practices, the only reason for that would be as a way of bolstering his own credibility. Not as a way of avoiding a lawsuit. For which there are precisely zero grounds. That's just not the way science, history, research, or journalism work.
i mean yeah dude, go get ur money. i like Johnny Harris but if you've worked this a good chunk of your life, then for sure dude he should've given u credit cause tbh i've never heard of you before until this video. i noticed that u made this vid a year ago; did u end up getting ur money, either from ur deal with him or did u sue lol??
I will definitely purchase your books.
I'm glad he now cites his sources
Have you tried reaching out to him and talking about it man to man? Maybe you both can make a follow up video together?
I really do not think that he used anything of yours, knowingly, or did so without listing sources. He is always very diligent about his sources from everything I have read and heard. it may not be the case with your work here however, sometimes things like this are down to multiple discovery or what’s also known as simultaneous invention. Also, if you could get a message to Johnny to speak to him he would probably take down anything that lacks proper sourcing. Just my two cents
couldnt help but smile with how tasteful this video was.
He should cite his sources and give reasonable credit to anyone that has put in years of work
I was watching Johnny's videos, and yours was the second video suggestion. I don't know if he ever bought a book, split the ad revenue, or gave you some credit later on, but at least you got me subscribed.
Imagine the trouble all college students would have just for not making their correct references and citations in their essays and video essays, or even imagine a world where every tiktok / reels / short creator would have to go through legal disputes in their Did you know videos, cuz they didn’t put their source in the description. This is delusional, specially cuz all of this if done right like Johny Harrys video would be fair use. This guy is just mad a popular video didnt cite his book, losing potential sales. So this is not about having proper references but rather missed sales.
I've always been fascinated by Johnny (similar background and internship experiences), but his work lately leans toward sensationalism and ignores complexity in geopolitics with broad strokes. There's always the "accessibility to novices" versus academic rigor. But his recent videos, plus this borderline plagiarism, doesn't bode well. In any classroom, not citing sources means plagiarism. Same standards should be applied, imo
He is awfully self centered too...
Johnny Harris is a sponsored propaganda tool hiding behind an independent, investigative journalist facade….
Most of this falls under fair use.
This is frustrating! Hope he sees this and corrects the citation atleast.
Point well made. I hope Tom got some kind of compensation...books bought, or a face to face apology.
Sue the shit out of him!
I didnt even know wow! His video are great don't get me wrong, but man worked for 15 YEARS? and someone else used the work WITHOUT permission?
omg, 15 years man, that's crazy
he should write sources wow
(I came from "How Johnny Harris Rewrites History" btw)
I get his point. When you have worked for something tirelessly and are passionate, it's okay for other people to use it but it feels like you are being ignored if not cited. Speaking from personal experience 😅😅
I actually think you should sue him! I was disappointed by the video's end. Call a good lawyer now.
Apple also didn’t invent most of the stuff that is in iPhone. I guess it was better packaged and visualized, “popularized”for big audiences. Can’t say though about the “plagiarism” or copyright things, however would be great to show of course respect for your long research work.
Harris is rigorous and professional in his work and I appreciate that you agree with it. There must be a reason for not citing some sources, but I don't think it's illegal, maybe unethical for a research paper. But is it for a journalistic style video? Did he actually ask you and then not cite you? If he didn't I don't see the problem unless he explicitly didn't do it for a specific reason.
The only reason why I like this video is the ending. You realized that information, even though you're the expert on it, does not belong to you. You also "stole" it, rather compiled it, from the Chinese inventors.
I do agree you should be quoted and given the appropriate credit for your work. I would really much appreciate a video or a post from Johnny on this.
But other than that he does not owe you anything by my book.
I would also probably donate a percentage 5/10% of the revenue to support the benefits that your research brought to him.
It's only fair
This should go viral. It's not fair!!!
While the frustration is understandable and the critique itself very much justified (I can't remember the first time this point came up in regards to his videos, but it has been an issue for a while imo.). I don't see on which basis you would possibly be able to sue him on this. "dick move, intentional or not" isn't legal basis. He has no obligation to cite any sources by law and making a product / profits based on prior research isn't illegal either.
Yes, It'd be great if everyone acted like Ragusea (I saw his name mentioned in the top comment) but thats a high bar and a matter of personal ethics... I do believe by now he got the point after his last shitstorm on that topic but either way, just cause something may not feel fair, it doesnt mean you got basis for legal actions or are owed anything.
(This is based on my rudimentary understanding of your legal system, I know it wouldnt even get to court here in Europe though)
Love this. Wonder-twin powers activate! Form of "a deeper dive..." Shape of "...a collaboration between two interesting skilled individuals attended by an audience of interested us-es."
he has finally cited sources in his latest video
But the fact is still, is that you probably didn’t reach so many people as him. Maybe you should collaborate with him instead of thinking about money in the bank stuff. The research you have done is tremendous ofcourse and he should cite you on this. The key with research is that eventually your research reaches alot of people that can learn from it. If you can’t do it yourself do it with johnny, vox or other youtube journalist. Thats my 2 cents.
I think you can licence your stuff and enforce it at will.
He still doesn't cite sources and he makes very one sided videos about Geo Politics.
Yes, you should.
NOT kewl what he did, period. You should have been cited at the beginning, your book given a shout out for more details,etc. Contact him, explain your position so he can do right by you. If no response, take the next step. Good luck Prof!
Its been 2 years. Did you sue?
Nah. I channeled it all to finishing my most recent book!
Did he ever answered?
I shit you not, the next suggested video is Johhny Harris's one on the QWERTY keyboard
But... did you ever get a new hat?
No pain no gain.. People learns from pain.
Wait did he ever contact you after this?
That is the sweetest response to plagiarism I have ever seen. Hope Johnny Harris had the good form to respond and apologise.
This is kind, thank you
Has Harris responded in any form?
he should split the revenue if as any respect for you and your work. it's ridiculous if does manage to get away with it. thankyou for your research.
What does India do for their language?
My suggestion would be that you hit him up personally and ask him to edit the description and credits to show your work credit. As for financially? Nah leave it alone especially if he's cool about it and willing to sight the source.