• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Did Mattpat from Game Theory commit plagarism?

Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Location
Australia
Did MattPat steal and comy someone elses work in his video about the Fortnite dance?
Watch this video from theperson who allegedly was the original creator of the content. Note Well, the video does talk about this issue from a copyright law perspective.

 

DekuNut

I play my drum for you
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Location
Tangent Universe
As I commented on this same video (and keep in mind that I watch both channels):

Admittedly, theres only so much pool to pull from with this stuff. If the GT team have proved nothing over the last few years, its that they're good at research. You cant talk about this case without discussing stuff like the copyright act of 1976. There are going to be natural similarities between any well-researched videos on this topic.
Besides, these videos take weeks of prep time, as stated multiple times on their channel. 8 days wouldn't have been long enough time for them to make their video.
They came out near each other because that's when it was relevant. They probably planned ahead a while before your video released, as they generally do. And, if they were really using your video as a basis, they probably would've been more factually correct :P

Besides, the GT Team left a comment on the video that not only explained themselves, but was pinned by James himself, showing that he seems to accept their explanation. Which is fair because its a good one, and outside the shade I threw just a more evidence-supported version of my comment
So no. They didn't.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Gender
Male
It doesn't help that this is blown out of proportion by fans of either side. All in all I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
 
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Location
Australia
Besides, the GT Team left a comment on the video that not only explained themselves, but was pinned by James himself, showing that he seems to accept their explanation. Which is fair because its a good one, and outside the shade I threw just a more evidence-supported version of my comment
So no. They didn't.
That's not accepting their side of the story. That's allowing the other side to have their say. Proving they do want both side of the story open and in the public for everyone to hear. Also Mattpat expecting to be privately contacted first? What? If you make a public video, expect to be publicly held to account for the content in your videos. That simple. The audience of both channels deserve to know what both sides feel about the situation.

Did MattPatt plagarise? I don't know. Nowhere does Mattpat justify how his script was written. We know he has lawyers on his team who research up for him. That's fine. Did he use that evidence to know his own video or did he take that evidence and just copy the other video in question in terms of how the video was set out. Also Matpatt says he had an initial draft of the video ready weeks before the other video was released. It would not be hard at all for his team to copy the style of the other video in a week using the evidence he had gathered. Assuming that he's telling the truth here. He's does have a very large team now so that is plausible.
Only a fool would believe that without evidence though.

So my overall opinion is sure, MattPat, his story sounds plausible but can only believed if he can back it all up with evidence. Without that it's just his own word which as we both know does not really stand up in a court of law. So I'll wait and see if Mattpat shares with us all the evidence to back up his claims.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom