If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   News: Discovery Channel To Mythbuster Fans: 'Abstain'... as channel yanks controversial sex episode. Fark: "Heh. Heh. He said "yank"   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 141
    More: Interesting, Discovery Channel, Mythbusters, discovery  
•       •       •

14886 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Feb 2014 at 3:17 PM (21 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



141 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-02-13 02:49:46 PM
Ah, I thought it was a case of "moral outrage". however, TFA tells us that the author, a lone wolf of entertainment and journalistic integrity, is having his series "Something I Have Never Heard Of and Will Never Watch or Read", blatantly stolen and plagiarized by the carrion feeding corporate vulture-bullies that are the combined two-headed dick dragon of Mythbusters and The Discovery Channel. He goes on to inform us, the fan club rooting for this underdog in this treacherous fight, that this is the third time his Ninja Lawyers have thrown their poison tipped cease and desist shurikens at this seemingly immortal animal that, while he has defeated three times before in a triumphant battle only eclipsed by such epics as "The Time I Sued the Paperboy for Damaging my Front Door", and "No, I Can and Will Trim Those Tree Branches", keeps coming back for more.

Will the two headed phallus monster return for another beating?! Will the Author finally get the recognition he deserves?!

Tune in at I Have No Idea on Sunday Through Monday for your next episode of "Something I Have Never Heard Of and Will Never Watch or Read" to find out.
 
2014-02-13 03:06:10 PM
Damn, and I really wanted to know whether or not the girl being on top prevents pregnancy.

Ya know, because of gravity and stuff.
 
2014-02-13 03:12:03 PM
I got something I'd like to bust..

img819.imageshack.us
 
2014-02-13 03:19:53 PM
There are some myths about Kari I'd like to bust.
 
2014-02-13 03:19:56 PM
I didn't even know the show was still on...
 
2014-02-13 03:20:01 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: I got something I'd like to bust..


Indeed.
 
2014-02-13 03:20:24 PM
What a biatchy writer
 
2014-02-13 03:20:30 PM
I was wondering what was going on until I gave up caring whoever this guy is because he just sounds like a whining-Hipster-type who came up with some web series and now wants to be recognized for a "know-nothing-about-dont-give-a-shiat-show" that apparently only a few folks in Australia have seen.

And now he prevents me seeing Kari Byron in a Mythbusters show about farking?!  Seriously, fark this guy!
 
2014-02-13 03:20:33 PM
i.chzbgr.com
 
2014-02-13 03:21:00 PM
IP cat fight? No thanks.
 
2014-02-13 03:21:31 PM
"After two weeks of masturbating and seeing no visible hair growing in the palm, I am going to call this myth busted, Adam".
 
2014-02-13 03:22:44 PM
Yeah, I really doubt that your little crusade about a show "stealing" incredibly common phrases and ideas from your website that I've never heard of had more to do with the episode being pulled than Discovery getting skittish about potential controversy.
 
2014-02-13 03:22:45 PM
Sounds kind of like the entertainment version of a patent troll.
 
2014-02-13 03:24:03 PM

Lost Thought 00: What a biatchy writer


God this. Talk about being a sore winner.
 
2014-02-13 03:24:16 PM
Wtf was that shiat
 
2014-02-13 03:24:32 PM
Based on the writing in TFA, this guy has to worry about his writing being stolen like W Bush has to worry about someone copying from him during a Mensa test.
 
2014-02-13 03:25:37 PM
He might as well have written "there's this awesome new episode of mythbusters that is all about sex, and you can't see it because of ME!"
 
2014-02-13 03:26:09 PM
I watch that show for the science...

xbradtc.files.wordpress.com

www.themehomes.net

xbradtc.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-02-13 03:26:24 PM
Like, hey dude, put down the reefer when you write.  It's like last Tuesday when, hey didn't I mention that my house burned down last week?

Anyway, where was I?  Oh yeah, they're having a Captain Kangaroo festival in Denver this weekend and....
 
2014-02-13 03:26:47 PM

germ78: Lost Thought 00: What a biatchy writer

God this. Talk about being a sore winner.


Whiner. He's a sore whiner.
 
2014-02-13 03:28:05 PM
So his show like many rip off the Mythbusters style. Thats ok. But when they do a show like his..... Shut down Discovery and Mythbusters. I's need's to get paid. Go back to trolling
 
2014-02-13 03:28:24 PM

faultytower: I was wondering what was going on until I gave up caring whoever this guy is because he just sounds like a whining-Hipster-type who came up with some web series and now wants to be recognized for a "know-nothing-about-dont-give-a-shiat-show" that apparently only a few folks in Australia have seen.

And now he prevents me seeing Kari Byron in a Mythbusters show about farking?!  Seriously, fark this guy!


... Came here on my soapbox (OK, actually from my bunk) to say this.  Thank you for saying this.
 
2014-02-13 03:29:38 PM

i.r.id10t: [i.chzbgr.com image 422x253]


THAT IS AWESOME
 
2014-02-13 03:29:54 PM

germ78: He might as well have written "there's this awesome new episode of mythbusters that is all about sex, and you can't see it because of ME!"


Followed by "Dear god please watch my show.  I linked to it at least 3 times already!"
 
2014-02-13 03:30:20 PM
Who is this John Hotchkiss douchnozzle and why do I give a shiat about his whaaaaaaaaaaaaaa??!

/ Oh right, I don't.

// Also, if you try and make me choose you or MythBusters... don't bother... just don't
 
2014-02-13 03:31:31 PM

scottydoesntknow: Damn, and I really wanted to know whether or not the girl being on top prevents pregnancy.

Ya know, because of gravity and stuff.


It does if the girl is wearing a strap-on and the boy is a bottom.

};-)>
 
2014-02-13 03:40:31 PM
All I heard was "blah blah blah biatch biatch Mythbusters"
Hey! That's a great show.
When is the episode gonna be on?
 
2014-02-13 03:43:07 PM

Sin_City_Superhero: I watch that show for the science...

[xbradtc.files.wordpress.com image 723x1024]

[www.themehomes.net image 640x960]

[xbradtc.files.wordpress.com image 640x734]


she blinded me with science!
 
2014-02-13 03:43:25 PM
Is NO ONE reading the whole story?

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.    Its pretty damn sleazy.   So they won't get broadcast in the US or Canada.  Who cares?   Mythbusters has already run away with the money.

Yes, we miss out on Kari.  That part sucks.   But why can't they think up their own ideas for a sex episode?
 
2014-02-13 03:46:29 PM
I'm almost motivated enough to create a HuffPost throwaway login just to tell this guy to go DIAF.
 
2014-02-13 03:47:23 PM
Kari is a flat chested, vapid AW, who along with Adam is who I blame for the pop-science-ification of MB.
 
2014-02-13 03:49:54 PM

Cyber_Junk: Is NO ONE reading the whole story?

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.    Its pretty damn sleazy.   So they won't get broadcast in the US or Canada.  Who cares?   Mythbusters has already run away with the money.

Yes, we miss out on Kari.  That part sucks.   But why can't they think up their own ideas for a sex episode?


His ideas were vague generalities involving common "myths". Not the sort of thing that is protected.


"Investigating five clichés about the laws of attraction; a preference to blondes; pheromones; tips correlating with breast size; wealth."

Or, what you'd come up with from scanning every fark thread about sex and relationships ever.
 
2014-02-13 03:50:51 PM
Mythbusters did a "Fastest Way To Navigate Through Highway Traffic" episode?
 
2014-02-13 03:51:07 PM
Ew, I almost drowned in tears.
 
2014-02-13 03:51:14 PM
Right... totally original concept there...
img.spokeo.com

No two people could have the same idea...
img42.imageshack.us

Completely unique, you are...
lanzone.info

Maybe there's some format we could use to test this theory...
img2.joyreactor.cc

And to close out this post...
i1.ytimg.com

I can do science me!
 
2014-02-13 03:52:30 PM

Cyber_Junk: Is NO ONE reading the whole story?

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.    Its pretty damn sleazy.   So they won't get broadcast in the US or Canada.  Who cares?   Mythbusters has already run away with the money.

Yes, we miss out on Kari.  That part sucks.   But why can't they think up their own ideas for a sex episode?


Everyone read it but no one cares because he's fat, also he whines, and he's not Kari. Also he cost us Kari.... I mean, he cost them Kari... I'm impartial in this... obviously.

thetvpage.com

More like, this vs fat, am I right folks?!

He's probably going to sue me for using that image. What a meanie!
 
2014-02-13 03:54:04 PM
Abstain? Is that when you get semen stains all over his/her abs?
 
2014-02-13 03:55:36 PM

Slaxl: Cyber_Junk: Is NO ONE reading the whole story?

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.    Its pretty damn sleazy.   So they won't get broadcast in the US or Canada.  Who cares?   Mythbusters has already run away with the money.

Yes, we miss out on Kari.  That part sucks.   But why can't they think up their own ideas for a sex episode?

Everyone read it but no one cares because he's fat, also he whines, and he's not Kari. Also he cost us Kari.... I mean, he cost them Kari... I'm impartial in this... obviously.

[thetvpage.com image 250x335]

More like, this vs fat, am I right folks?!

He's probably going to sue me for using that image. What a meanie!


Didn't even see the picture. Now I'm gonna send his moobs a "cease and desist" AMIRITE HAHAHAhs I CAN TYPING
 
2014-02-13 03:56:25 PM
Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.


According to this guy, anyway.
 
2014-02-13 03:57:08 PM
Really good gimmick to drive DVD sales: the episode that was too [whatever] to show on TV.
 
GBB
2014-02-13 03:57:17 PM
So, a web-only "TV" show, with a singular copyright year of 2014, that essentially is a Mythbusters Mr Wizard ripoff, sans kids, is upset that they happened to cover the same topics that can be found on any fan site for the show in question??

I'm sure the creator of just about every sitcom is just inundated with C&D letters from the first sitcom ever created, right?
 
2014-02-13 03:58:43 PM
Myths are myths because a significant percentage of the population believes them. I don't see how you can "own" the idea of examining a common  myth. That's like "owning" the concept of finding out whether turkey really causes drowsiness.
 
2014-02-13 04:02:30 PM

Cyber_Junk: Is NO ONE reading the whole story?

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.    Its pretty damn sleazy.   So they won't get broadcast in the US or Canada.  Who cares?   Mythbusters has already run away with the money.

Yes, we miss out on Kari.  That part sucks.   But why can't they think up their own ideas for a sex episode?


How about we go a few levels deeper?  What is an idea?  What constitutes an obvious idea?  What protection under the law does an "idea" have?

Hint: the last answer is NONE.
 
2014-02-13 04:02:51 PM

Sin_City_Superhero: I watch that show for the science...

[xbradtc.files.wordpress.com image 723x1024]

[www.themehomes.net image 640x960]

[xbradtc.files.wordpress.com image 640x734]


"...and now on Mythbusters, Kari will show us how to find the G spot. Kari, over to you..."
 
2014-02-13 04:04:11 PM
Because as I have previously alleged, Discovery and Mythbusters misappropriated content from my series, This vs That. And now they were misappropriating even more ideas of mine along with a title for an entirely different show... that I had also pitched to them, called: "The Laws of Attraction."

forum.sportsmogul.com

Google search for "The Laws of Attraction": About 1.96 million hits, including a 2004 movie.

But yeah, I'm so sure they stole the title from you, Mr WhineyAuthor.

Also, you can't copyright or trademark or whatever a book/movie/song/whatever title, so -- in the end -- be prepared to lose your argument.
 
2014-02-13 04:04:59 PM

Cyber_Junk: Is NO ONE reading the whole story?

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.    Its pretty damn sleazy.   So they won't get broadcast in the US or Canada.  Who cares?   Mythbusters has already run away with the money.

Yes, we miss out on Kari.  That part sucks.   But why can't they think up their own ideas for a sex episode?


No. They prefer their uninformed snark and fanboy fawning of some chick.

If you click through the links on that page providing more background information it looks pretty damning. Considering the guys history in the biz and the amount of corroborating information he's kept, he probably has a case. We'll see.

Keep posting pics of Kari though.
 
2014-02-13 04:05:16 PM

someonelse: Myths are myths because a significant percentage of the population believes them. I don't see how you can "own" the idea of examining a common  myth. That's like "owning" the concept of finding out whether turkey really causes drowsiness.


Trademarks on the words "Candy" and "Apple" and patents on "Buy Now" buttons beg to differ.

Sadly.
 
2014-02-13 04:05:20 PM

blahpers: Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.

According to this guy, anyway.


So Australia is just a conspiracy of cartographers?

The Mythbusters photocopy of the ThisVSThat episode (a side by side comparison):
http://imgur.com/a/CnBLs
 
2014-02-13 04:10:15 PM

Cyber_Junk: Is NO ONE reading the whole story?

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.


I did see that, and, even the allegations are completely true, I hope the Mythbusters air the episode everywhere and never pay the guy a cent.  I want this guy to be stolen from.

However, I doubt he has a legitimate claim.  As far as I can tell, he's alleging they stole content based on the title of the episode.  Unless he has knowledge he's not revealing (and I doubt that, because I doubt he'd pass up a way to make himself look even more like a douche) his only reasonable claim is that they stole the title.
 
2014-02-13 04:10:47 PM
From what I read he was in negotiations with Discovery for them to buy his series, they wanted to buy the rights to his series without bringing him on board to be a part of it. He said no so Discovery went ahead and just used his ideas. If you look beyond the linked article there is actually a lot of proof.

Also, does anyone here really want to support the network that brought us ghost hunting reality shows?
 
2014-02-13 04:13:19 PM

Cyber_Junk: blahpers: Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.

According to this guy, anyway.

So Australia is just a conspiracy of cartographers?

The Mythbusters photocopy of the ThisVSThat episode (a side by side comparison):
http://imgur.com/a/CnBLs


Wait, so "This" guy trolls Discovery Channel's Mythbusters board, plucks ideas from there, and then complains that they stole his idea when they get around to following up on the myth?

"They" stole "his" idea of putting cameras on the outside and inside of vehicles? And of showing a graphic of a race-course map?

Ho. Lee. shiat.

Color me convinced.
 
2014-02-13 04:16:16 PM
That may be the whiniest pile of drivel I have read in a long while.  Too bad someone posted a picture because I wanted to take a stab at blindly describing this guy.
 
2014-02-13 04:18:00 PM
All I'm really seeing here is that this guy had some amazingly original ideas like "Is it faster to drive or fly from San Francisco to LA?" and something to do with airplane boarding efficiency. The side-by-side comparisons are pretty ridiculous, since most of the things are like "They both used passengers with various types of luggage!" (he actually uses this one twice) and "They both put a bunch of cameras on the cars in the experiment!" as if those are unusual enough to indicate plagiarism.

And now he's appalled at the fact that Mythbusters used the same unoriginal title he did, "Law of Attraction," for... well, we don't actually know, since he's apparently chucked a lawsuit at them before it even aired because he's so sure they ripped him off. Sheesh.
 
2014-02-13 04:18:25 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: I got something I'd like to bust..

[img819.imageshack.us image 613x720]


Came for this. Only 3rd post in. I knew you wouldn't disappoint, SH.
 
2014-02-13 04:19:31 PM

Cyber_Junk: blahpers: Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.

According to this guy, anyway.

So Australia is just a conspiracy of cartographers?

The Mythbusters photocopy of the ThisVSThat episode (a side by side comparison):
http://imgur.com/a/CnBLs


From the link:
This vs That creates a map to outline the race route. So does Mythbusters.
This vs That puts cameras on the cars, inside the cars, and on "chase cars" during the race. So does Mythbusters.


Well, I'm convinced.  Before This vs That premiered in Nov. 2012, Mythbusters did no car-based episodes using cameras on the cars or maps. There's no way that Mythbusters would have come up with ground-breaking innovations like these on their own.
 
2014-02-13 04:20:32 PM

Shahab: From what I read he was in negotiations with Discovery for them to buy his series, they wanted to buy the rights to his series without bringing him on board to be a part of it.


Wow, I can't believe Discovery wouldn't want to involve this guy.
 
2014-02-13 04:20:54 PM

ArcadianRefugee: "They" stole "his" idea of putting cameras on the outside and inside of vehicles? And of showing a graphic of a race-course map?

Ho. Lee. shiat.

Color me convinced.


*Shakes tiny fist.*
 
2014-02-13 04:25:57 PM

Cyber_Junk: Is NO ONE reading the whole story?

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.    Its pretty damn sleazy.   So they won't get broadcast in the US or Canada.  Who cares?   Mythbusters has already run away with the money.

Yes, we miss out on Kari.  That part sucks.   But why can't they think up their own ideas for a sex episode?


Science is all about repeatable results.
 
2014-02-13 04:27:12 PM
"Three's Company" stole my idea for the wacky misunderstanding episode.
 
2014-02-13 04:29:53 PM

joeflood: Science is all about repeatable results.


LOL excellent point

This guy sounds like a douche.  One of the commenters on the original article has it right- if he had a legal leg to stand on, he wouldn't be whining on the internet.  Instead, he'd be making out like a fat cat in a courtroom.

Why doesn't Discovery simply re-title the episode and release it?
 
2014-02-13 04:30:42 PM

someonelse: "Three's Company" stole my idea for the wacky misunderstanding episode.


"Three's Company" is based on the British sitcom, "Man About the House".

Will the plagiarism never cease!
 
2014-02-13 04:31:44 PM

juvandy: joeflood: Science is all about repeatable results.

LOL excellent point

This guy sounds like a douche.  One of the commenters on the original article has it right- if he had a legal leg to stand on, he wouldn't be whining on the internet.  Instead, he'd be making out like a fat cat in a courtroom.

Why doesn't Discovery simply re-title the episode and release it?


"Why Jon Hotchkiss Isn't Getting Laid" would probably also draw a lawsuit.
 
2014-02-13 04:31:57 PM
Why is it that the author of articles that take the form of "FACT: blah blah blah" statements is an insufferable asshole?
 
2014-02-13 04:33:43 PM

Cyber_Junk: blahpers: Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.

According to this guy, anyway.

So Australia is just a conspiracy of cartographers?

The Mythbusters photocopy of the ThisVSThat episode (a side by side comparison):
http://imgur.com/a/CnBLs


Extremely common ideas for experiments about traffic, I am sure thousands of stoned college students have come up the exact same ideas in the last couple years, I know I did back in the day.

1-  OMG both programs used a map to show viewers the route that drivers are going to make.  No one could have thought of that on their own...

2- I know that Mythbusters used camera mounts inside and out as well as chase cars...maybe a decade ago.  Thanks for pointing out that This vs That is copying Mythbusters.

3- Mythbusters has been using the crash test dummy since the 1st show....not sure how its use is copying.

4- There are 2 popular types of intersections, not sure how they could test traffic without trying out both.

5- Weave vs Stay in Your Lane.  These are two of the traffic myths that EVERYONE who has ever thought about ways to get places faster have thought about.  Not a unique thought.

6- Phantom Jam.  I'm sure that This vs That didn't steal the idea of Phantom Jam from http://phantomtraffic.com/  This site has been around for at least 4 years.

7- Fly vs Drive....Seriously my brother and I were discussing how to get to San Francisco last month.  Driving vs Flying I guess we stole the idea from This vs That.

None of the ideas presented by This vs That are unique.  What it does look like though
 
2014-02-13 04:33:51 PM

Khellendros: Why is it that the author of articles that take the form of "FACT: blah blah blah" statements is an insufferable asshole?


Correction for my annoyed grammar-impaired self - Why is it that the author of any article that takes the form of "FACT: blah blah blah" statements is an insufferable asshole?
 
2014-02-13 04:38:39 PM
Fact: that dumbshiat can't write worth a damn.
 
2014-02-13 04:38:42 PM

faultytower: I was wondering what was going on until I gave up caring whoever this guy is because he just sounds like a whining-Hipster-type who came up with some web series and now wants to be recognized for a "know-nothing-about-dont-give-a-shiat-show" that apparently only a few folks in Australia have seen.

And now he prevents me seeing Kari Byron in a Mythbusters show about farking?!  Seriously, fark this guy!


/You and me both. I got about 2 paragraphs in, and my give a shiat meter broke.
 
2014-02-13 04:39:47 PM

MrBallou: Came for this. Only 3rd post in. I knew you wouldn't disappoint, SH.


img837.imageshack.us


If you like that, try this.
 
2014-02-13 04:42:27 PM

Cyber_Junk: blahpers: Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.

According to this guy, anyway.

So Australia is just a conspiracy of cartographers?

The Mythbusters photocopy of the ThisVSThat episode (a side by side comparison):
http://imgur.com/a/CnBLs


Hey, everybody, I think we found Hotchkiss's fark id.

But seriously, did you actually look at the imgur link? Most of them are basic TV production techniques. He may as well go after Top Gear for putting cameras on cars, having wacky guests and having races between different types of transport. And, in one slide, he claims that the Mythbusters phantom jam experiment set up is comparing roundabouts to traditional junctions; in the next, it's the phantom jam experiment.

I didn't want to sully myself by actually visiting his shiatty blog, so I googled "wtf is this vs that", and found this, where Fark's very own Phil Plait delivered a very well written smackdown on him:

I have written several times about sexism - and sometimes outright misogyny - in the skeptical and scientific communities. I want to promote getting more young girls interested in these topic so they can grow up to be scientists, and not have to deal with institutional and cultural sexism. Given the way you promoted the show (as well as only having men as guests, apparently), I don't see "This Vs That" as furthering this cause, and in fact would appear to impede it. For that reason, I won't be promoting it.


/Is it not simply a rip off of the Mythbusters concept anyway?
 
2014-02-13 04:44:21 PM

Kahabut: Cyber_Junk: Is NO ONE reading the whole story?

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.    Its pretty damn sleazy.   So they won't get broadcast in the US or Canada.  Who cares?   Mythbusters has already run away with the money.

Yes, we miss out on Kari.  That part sucks.   But why can't they think up their own ideas for a sex episode?

How about we go a few levels deeper?  What is an idea?  What constitutes an obvious idea?  What protection under the law does an "idea" have?

Hint: the last answer is NONE.


So if the entire premise of 'A Game of Thrones' was stolen, the names changed, but the central premises/action untouched it would be okay?   I'd be pretty pissed.
"Next up on SyFy, 'The Duke of the Rings', followed by a six part miniseries 'Andrews Game'"

aerojockey: Cyber_Junk: Is NO ONE reading the whole story?

Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.

I did see that, and, even the allegations are completely true, I hope the Mythbusters air the episode everywhere and never pay the guy a cent.  I want this guy to be stolen from.

However, I doubt he has a legitimate claim.  As far as I can tell, he's alleging they stole content based on the title of the episode.  Unless he has knowledge he's not revealing (and I doubt that, because I doubt he'd pass up a way to make himself look even more like a douche) his only reasonable claim is that they stole the title.



from the link:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-hotchkiss/the-discovery-channel-and _ b_4434576.html

"When I'm done, I leave them a 70 page "bible" of future experiments. "      <- this is where they got their ideas, from his pitch indicating where he wanted to go, not from episode titles.
 
2014-02-13 04:50:14 PM

iron de havilland: I didn't want to sully myself by actually visiting his shiatty blog, so I googled "wtf is this vs that", and found this, where Fark's very own Phil Plait delivered a very well written smackdown on him:


Wow- after reading this, I'm really surprised that Huffington Post is willing to post anything this asshole writes.
 
2014-02-13 04:52:50 PM

Cyber_Junk: "Next up on SyFy, 'The Duke of the Rings', followed by a six part miniseries 'Andrews Game'"


Yeah, about that....

Cyber_Junk: "When I'm done, I leave them a 70 page "bible" of future experiments. " <- this is where they got their ideas, from his pitch indicating where he wanted to go, not from episode titles.


Right. That whole forum they have for idea submissions is just there for show.

/wait, lemme guess: having a web page where fans can discuss the show and postulate new myths to test... that was his idea too, right?
 
2014-02-13 04:55:06 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: MrBallou: Came for this. Only 3rd post in. I knew you wouldn't disappoint, SH.

[img837.imageshack.us image 650x330]


If you like that, try this.

You are a God among men.

 
2014-02-13 04:59:35 PM

Cyber_Junk: from the link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-hotchkiss/the-discovery-channel-and _ b_4434576.html

"When I'm done, I leave them a 70 page "bible" of future experiments. " <- this is where they got their ideas, from his pitch indicating where he wanted to go, not from episode titles.


Good.  I hope Mythbusters "steals" every idea the guy has and never pays him.  I want pricks to be treated unfairly.
 
2014-02-13 05:13:01 PM

Sin_City_Superhero: I watch that show for the science...

[xbradtc.files.wordpress.com image 723x1024]

[www.themehomes.net image 640x960]

[xbradtc.files.wordpress.com image 640x734]


Ok ... this has been shopped, right?? Can someone tell by the pixels?
 
2014-02-13 05:15:43 PM
Whether the G-spot is a myth. I'll test it out on Kari. Repeatedly...whether i can find it thru the front door of the back... or for more vefication...with that tatooed chick that used to be on there.

i'll take the hit for SCIENCE
 
2014-02-13 05:22:09 PM
Too bad this article is super lame and has nothing to do with busting sex myths.

I had heard a story once about 2 fat people having sexytime and the dude had used a bag of Doritos or something for a condom and the chick had forgotten about it. She goes to the doctor some time later and the doctor finds the bag in there.

So I want Mythbusters to do something on that.
 
2014-02-13 05:27:11 PM
Cyber_Junk:
"When I'm done, I leave them a 70 page "bible" of future experiments. "      <- this is where they got their ideas, from his pitch indicating where he wanted to go, not from episode titles.

So, he takes a popular show, steals the premise of the show entirely but tries to make it "sexier" (a/k/a "sexist"), chooses some myths they haven't gotten around to yet in their several season but that will obviously need to be covered as the show runs out of other myths to bust, lists all of those ideas in a "Bible" of future experiments, pitches his show ideas to the network already producing the identical formatted show he is stealing from, and then claims that they are stealing his ideas when a couple of the future episodes cover any topic in his "70-page bible"?  Honestly, that's a pretty ingenious plan to troll the network for some settlement money.

If this works, who wants to work with me on a "new" show idea where we take top-of-the-line chefs, and have them compete against each other in an elimination format by engaging in off-the-wall challenges against the clock, which we will pitch to Bravo?  All we have to do is come up with about 50 wacky challenges that Top Chef hasn't gotten to yet, put them in a "Bible," and wait for Top Chef to just come close to what we proposed.  Step 3, here we come!
 
2014-02-13 05:29:52 PM

Far Cough: someonelse: Myths are myths because a significant percentage of the population believes them. I don't see how you can "own" the idea of examining a common  myth. That's like "owning" the concept of finding out whether turkey really causes drowsiness.

Trademarks on the words "Candy" and "Apple" and patents on "Buy Now" buttons beg to differ.

Sadly.


The words "candy" and "apple" are not trade-marked.  The USE of Apple in commerce is protected under certain circumstances.  Specifically, you cannot market a computer as an "Apple" - the specific protection is offered for the obvious purpose of avoiding confusion in the marketplace.  But Apple Computer can't do anything to stop you from calling a car, magazine or night club "Apple".  Likewise the specific Apple logo is a trademark, but any old image of an apple with a bite taken out of it isn't - and using one would only be actionable in a cases where someone was trying to sell computers bearing a similar logo for the purpose of fooling the public.  Or did you think WalMart actually "owns" the word "Always"?

The clown has no case.
 
2014-02-13 05:31:58 PM

LonMead: Right... totally original concept there...
[img.spokeo.com image 800x600]

No two people could have the same idea...
[img42.imageshack.us image 640x400]

Completely unique, you are...
[lanzone.info image 640x400]

Maybe there's some format we could use to test this theory...
[img2.joyreactor.cc image 490x288]

And to close out this post...
[i1.ytimg.com image 480x360]

I can do science me!


Why does Hamster look like he had  more brain damage pre-accident?
 
2014-02-13 05:36:45 PM

aerojockey: Shahab: From what I read he was in negotiations with Discovery for them to buy his series, they wanted to buy the rights to his series without bringing him on board to be a part of it.

Wow, I can't believe Discovery wouldn't want to involve this guy.


I have no problem with Discovery not hiring this guy, and I actually think that his ideas where fairly obvious and should not be afforded any kind of copyright protections. That being said everyone is acting like this guy is on the fringe and has no reason to be upset, whereas if it is true that Discovery tried to buy his show This vs That then took the pitched ideas and made Mythbusters episodes out of them when negotiations didn't go anywhere, well then I completely understand why he is mad.
 
2014-02-13 05:42:22 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: MrBallou: Came for this. Only 3rd post in. I knew you wouldn't disappoint, SH.

[img837.imageshack.us image 650x330]


If you like that, try this.


you're a saint
 
2014-02-13 05:42:46 PM

faultytower: I was wondering what was going on until I gave up caring whoever this guy is because he just sounds like a whining-Hipster-type who came up with some web series and now wants to be recognized for a "know-nothing-about-dont-give-a-shiat-show" that apparently only a few folks in Australia have seen.

And now he prevents me seeing Kari Byron in a Mythbusters show about farking?!  Seriously, fark this guy!


I hate saying "this", but THIS!
 
2014-02-13 05:45:00 PM

ArcadianRefugee: someonelse: "Three's Company" stole my idea for the wacky misunderstanding episode.

"Three's Company" is based on the British sitcom, "Man About the House".

Will the plagiarism never cease!


Wacky misunderstandings were the main event on "I Love Lucy".

CSB: When my daughter was 8 we were watching some old Lucy episode when she turned to me and said, "Hey! They did that on one of my Disney shows!" I was so proud of her for recognizing that modern TV just continues to rip off from the best.
 
2014-02-13 05:54:27 PM

Tanukis_Parachute: Whether the G-spot is a myth. I'll test it out on Kari. Repeatedly...whether i can find it thru the front door of the back... or for more vefication...with that tatooed chick that used to be on there.

i'll take the hit for SCIENCE


Either that or put her on the Sybian. For Science!
 
2014-02-13 06:07:55 PM
What a douche. He thinks no one has ever pondered these questions before?

img.fark.net
 
2014-02-13 06:10:47 PM

jdemartino: The words "candy" and "apple" are not trade-marked.  The USE of Apple in commerce is protected under certain circumstances.  Specifically, you cannot market a computer as an "Apple" - the specific protection is offered for the obvious purpose of avoiding confusion in the marketplace.


It also relates to why The Beatles' music was unavailable on iTunes for umpty years. Computer Apple's forays into music, with iTunes, infringed on Apple Corps' trademark on the word Apple, in the field of music.

germ78: Tanukis_Parachute: Whether the G-spot is a myth. I'll test it out on Kari. Repeatedly...whether i can find it thru the front door of the back... or for more vefication...with that tatooed chick that used to be on there.

i'll take the hit for SCIENCE

Either that or put her on the Sybian. For Science!


i.imgur.com
 
2014-02-13 06:20:19 PM

jdemartino: Far Cough: someonelse: Myths are myths because a significant percentage of the population believes them. I don't see how you can "own" the idea of examining a common  myth. That's like "owning" the concept of finding out whether turkey really causes drowsiness.

Trademarks on the words "Candy" and "Apple" and patents on "Buy Now" buttons beg to differ.

Sadly.

The words "candy" and "apple" are not trade-marked.  The USE of Apple in commerce is protected under certain circumstances.  Specifically, you cannot market a computer as an "Apple" - the specific protection is offered for the obvious purpose of avoiding confusion in the marketplace.  But Apple Computer can't do anything to stop you from calling a car, magazine or night club "Apple".  Likewise the specific Apple logo is a trademark, but any old image of an apple with a bite taken out of it isn't - and using one would only be actionable in a cases where someone was trying to sell computers bearing a similar logo for the purpose of fooling the public.  Or did you think WalMart actually "owns" the word "Always"?

The clown has no case.


UPS has a trademark on the color brown. No joke.
I worry about being sued every morning, while sitting in the smallest room in my house.
 
2014-02-13 06:20:45 PM

edmo: What a douche. He thinks no one has ever pondered these questions before?

[img.fark.net image 500x498]


I think the quote is: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - Shia LaBffff
 
2014-02-13 06:22:05 PM
So what you're alleging is that as a direct result of actions taken by you, Mr. Hotchkiss, I don't get to see Kari Byron engaging in the exploration of various myths of a sexy nature.  Well of course I'm on your side now!
 
2014-02-13 06:39:40 PM

i.r.id10t: [i.chzbgr.com image 422x253]


"Sopposed"? :/
 
2014-02-13 06:40:31 PM
Mythbusters is basically a ripe off of the summer my dad gave me a box of fire crackers.

/CSB
When I was 12 I found a book on pyrotechnics on my fathers book shelf.  My father being a teacher and knowing what kids are like preceded to bring me large (1 kg or bigger) containers of chemicals to make my own fireworks.  There was a spot on the lawn where I tested my creations that  grass didn't grow on for more than a decade
 
2014-02-13 06:42:54 PM
This guy sounds like the entertainment version of a patent troll.

I had an idea for a TV show about zombies once. AMC better pull up a dump truck fill of money to my house or I'm gonna go wine on the internet about it.
 
2014-02-13 06:47:37 PM

angstycoder: i.r.id10t: [i.chzbgr.com image 422x253]

"Sopposed"? :/


hey i didnt make that. just thought it was both teh funnay and relevant to the thread
 
2014-02-13 06:50:15 PM

LonMead: edmo: What a douche. He thinks no one has ever pondered these questions before?

[img.fark.net image 500x498]

I think the quote is: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - Shia LaBffff


I'm pretty sure Rand Paul said that.
 
2014-02-13 06:52:36 PM

Shahab: aerojockey: Shahab: From what I read he was in negotiations with Discovery for them to buy his series, they wanted to buy the rights to his series without bringing him on board to be a part of it.

Wow, I can't believe Discovery wouldn't want to involve this guy.

I have no problem with Discovery not hiring this guy, and I actually think that his ideas where fairly obvious and should not be afforded any kind of copyright protections. That being said everyone is acting like this guy is on the fringe and has no reason to be upset, whereas if it is true that Discovery tried to buy his show This vs That then took the pitched ideas and made Mythbusters episodes out of them when negotiations didn't go anywhere, well then I completely understand why he is mad.


I can understand being mad if someone stole their ideas. But if you are a whiny douche about it I won't exactly be crying a river for you.

However, I still think he's in a weak position. Ideas are not content. This guy repeatedly uses the word content but as far as I can tell he doesn't have any idea what the content of the show he's whining about is, all he knows is the title. His only non-laughable IP infringement claim is that trade secrets were stolen, and that's not as clear cut as copyright infringement.
 
2014-02-13 07:11:49 PM
The flavor of sour grapes was so strong in that article, you could press it into a fine....whine

\here all night
\\tip your waitress
 
2014-02-13 07:15:39 PM
Even funnayer are these comments from this site:

"By using my work, they have literally taken food from my children's mouths. They have endangered the welfare of my family."

1) 5-yard penalty for misuse of the word "literally"
2) Looking at your photo, I am doubting your claim that there is a food shortage at your home. And, if there is, that photo shows why.

(I'm saying he's fat.)

"Hotchkiss says he received a call from a Discovery executive last night (12/12/13) asking him to not go public with his story, but declining to offer any monetary compensation for his "stolen" work."

Translation: "Mr Hotchkiss? Yeah, Discovery here. I would advise you to refrain from going public with these accusations, as you're likely to be humiliated. No, we won't pay you to not embarrass yourself, dumbass."
 
2014-02-13 07:21:48 PM

Pick: "After two weeks of masturbating and seeing no visible hair growing in the palm, I am going to call this myth busted, Adam".


"So, it appears to be true.  If you drag your feet across the floor while wearing socks, it truly will be a Shocker."
 
2014-02-13 07:22:37 PM

MemeSlave: Kari is a flat chested, vapid AW, who along with Adam is who I blame for the pop-science-ification of MB.


I dont think that word means what you think.
 
2014-02-13 07:22:40 PM

haknudsen: Cyber_Junk: blahpers: Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.

According to this guy, anyway.

So Australia is just a conspiracy of cartographers?

The Mythbusters photocopy of the ThisVSThat episode (a side by side comparison):
http://imgur.com/a/CnBLs

Extremely common ideas for experiments about traffic, I am sure thousands of stoned college students have come up the exact same ideas in the last couple years, I know I did back in the day.

1-  OMG both programs used a map to show viewers the route that drivers are going to make.  No one could have thought of that on their own...

2- I know that Mythbusters used camera mounts inside and out as well as chase cars...maybe a decade ago.  Thanks for pointing out that This vs That is copying Mythbusters.

3- Mythbusters has been using the crash test dummy since the 1st show....not sure how its use is copying.

4- There are 2 popular types of intersections, not sure how they could test traffic without trying out both.

5- Weave vs Stay in Your Lane.  These are two of the traffic myths that EVERYONE who has ever thought about ways to get places faster have thought about.  Not a unique thought.

6- Phantom Jam.  I'm sure that This vs That didn't steal the idea of Phantom Jam from http://phantomtraffic.com/  This site has been around for at least 4 years.

7- Fly vs Drive....Seriously my brother and I were discussing how to get to San Francisco last month.  Driving vs Flying I guess we stole the idea from This vs That.

None of the ideas presented by This vs That are unique.  What it does look like though


Not that I don't get what you are saying, but the article authors complaint is that he pitched the idea(s) for this type of show to Discovery channel a full year and a half before the first airing of Mythbusters.  He further alleges that Discovery channel keeps taking those ideas from his original pitch and incorporating them into Mythbusters.

I get hating on the guy because he is a douche, but I do understand where he is coming from. Further, if his claims are true, then the whole premise of the show Mythbusters was stolen and the true creator of that particular content was never compensated for it.

And from what I've read and seen about this, Discovery is being a bigger douche by not compensating this guy for his idea.

He has a long, uphill battle to try to wrest anything out of them though.
 
2014-02-13 07:23:01 PM

Special Guest: UPS has a trademark on the color brown. No joke.
I worry about being sued every morning, while sitting in the smallest room in my house.


Uh, I think you're OK so long as you don't try to deliver it to anyone.

/Royal Mail in the UK has a trademark on the colour red.
//Doesn't affect anyone, unless they try and associate themselves with postal services in the UK by the use of the colour; it's how trademark law works.
 
2014-02-13 07:27:57 PM

AbiNormal: Fact: that dumbshiat can't write worth a damn.


This.  His blog AND his nearly non-existent program that no one has ever heard of...suck.

\and as for the comment about ratings sucking...they put them on Saturday night.  And the open was going up against football.  Pretty sure the latter hasn't happened to them before.
 
2014-02-13 07:37:51 PM

TheGreenMonkey: Not that I don't get what you are saying, but the article authors complaint is that he pitched the idea(s) for this type of show to Discovery channel a full year and a half before the first airing of Mythbusters.  He further alleges that Discovery channel keeps taking those ideas from his original pitch and incorporating them into Mythbusters.


No, Mythbusters started in 2003.

Dickbag claims that he gave his 70 page "bible" for his crappy blog that rips off the Mythbusters format to producers from Mythbusters 18 months ago, before they investigated concepts obvious to sceptical investigation shows.

Did you miss this, upthread?

Where he tries to claim that common TV production techniques are somehow evidence that Mythbusters are stifling his rights and so on?

He's an attention whore with a crappy blog that rips off the Mythbusters format.

More simply, a twunt.
 
2014-02-13 07:49:22 PM

Oldiron_79: MemeSlave: Kari is a flat chested, vapid AW, who along with Adam is who I blame for the pop-science-ification of MB.

I dont think that word means what you think.


I don't think any of those words mean what he thinks they mean.
 
2014-02-13 07:52:53 PM

TheGreenMonkey: the article authors complaint is that he pitched the idea(s) for this type of show to Discovery channel a full year and a half before the first airing of Mythbusters


Mythbusters aired in 2003; he pitched to them in 2010. His claim is that they turned him down but are "folding his ideas, gleaned from the 'bible', into Mythbusters".

More likely: they turned him down because they had shiat like that already on the drawing board for MB as potential "filler".
 
2014-02-13 08:00:07 PM

iron de havilland: TheGreenMonkey: Not that I don't get what you are saying, but the article authors complaint is that he pitched the idea(s) for this type of show to Discovery channel a full year and a half before the first airing of Mythbusters.  He further alleges that Discovery channel keeps taking those ideas from his original pitch and incorporating them into Mythbusters.

No, Mythbusters started in 2003.

Dickbag claims that he gave his 70 page "bible" for his crappy blog that rips off the Mythbusters format to producers from Mythbusters 18 months ago, before they investigated concepts obvious to sceptical investigation shows.

Did you miss this, upthread?

Where he tries to claim that common TV production techniques are somehow evidence that Mythbusters are stifling his rights and so on?

He's an attention whore with a crappy blog that rips off the Mythbusters format.

More simply, a twunt.


Miscomprehension on my part then.  Was going off an article I read some months ago about this that stated he pitched his show before Mythbusters ever aired, and juxtaposing that one with this one.  Methinks the first story I read got it wrong.

Mea culpa

/agree with your assessment otherwise though
 
2014-02-13 08:06:55 PM
Hahaha.  I LOVE how the guy claiming Mythbusters stole his ideas thinks that:

1) He's the only person to have ever come up with the term "Laws of Attraction"

2) He's the only person to have ever "investigated" the idea that men prefer blondes

3) He's the only person to have ever "investigated" the idea effect on men of big boobs on women

4) He's the only person to have ever "investigated" whether pheromones work

5) He's the only person to have ever "investigated" whether women find men with money attractive.
 
2014-02-13 08:06:58 PM

TheGreenMonkey: Mea culpa


Good words.

/respect.
 
2014-02-13 08:15:41 PM
While I understand this guy's point and concerns, I feel he has a weak case. To me, there is no such thing as an original idea or concept anymore. There's so many people pushing so many different ideas for various things that it's impossible to not find something that is truly unique.

In the evidence he presents, I find many holes. In the imgur link posted up thread, he notes things that he claims Mythbusters stole from him. Well, as iron de havilland noted; the guy might as well sue Top Gear for the same camera tricks. Also, TG did a plane vs car challenge and they showed a map of their routes! And I know that episode (as well as episodes with similar races and maps) aired in the USA on BBC America. But he's not going to sue the BBC, is he?

To me, this guy's issue is more sour grapes than anything else. He's pissed that his show wasn't picked up by Discovery and that the show they did choose to buy is successful while he's stuck with a web show. He might be able to prove  some of his arguments, but many of them are really grasping at straws.
 
2014-02-13 08:31:54 PM

Cyber_Junk: blahpers: Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.

According to this guy, anyway.

So Australia is just a conspiracy of cartographers?

The Mythbusters photocopy of the ThisVSThat episode (a side by side comparison):
http://imgur.com/a/CnBLs


Nobody tell this dude about Top Gear! He'll retroactively sue the BBC back to the 1977 debut!
 
2014-02-13 08:35:18 PM
I agree the guy is a whiny clown. I'm also enjoying the comments on the HuffPo page too where Hodgkiss responds to everyone's pretty sensible criticisms of his argument with "well you'll only be able to make an informed judgement once you've been to my webpage and gotten all the facts I couldn't fit into TFA".

I also agree with the farker who reminded us that the tattooed chick who was not much of a science tech who was on the early eps was also distractingly hot. In my view anyway.
 
2014-02-13 08:38:11 PM
Even if everything this guy believes is true...how do you justify being upset at a network for 'stealing your ideas', when 'your ideas' were close enough to a show they were already airing that they could be used on that show?

If you steal from a thief, is it robbery?

Personally, I believe these ideas were vague enough that there is no case of infringement here. I tend to agree with

ArcadianRefugee: More likely: they turned him down because they had shiat like that already on the drawing board for MB as potential "filler".

 
2014-02-13 09:39:45 PM

Dumb-Ass-Monkey: Cyber_Junk: blahpers: Mythbusters stole a whole bunch of this guy's ideas, made episodes of it, and then broadcast them in Australia.

According to this guy, anyway.

So Australia is just a conspiracy of cartographers?

The Mythbusters photocopy of the ThisVSThat episode (a side by side comparison):
http://imgur.com/a/CnBLs

Nobody tell this dude about Top Gear! He'll retroactively sue the BBC back to the 1977 debut!



(shrug) well if everyone else sees it that way then I guess I'm missing something.

/and, of course, I'd enjoy seeing a sex themed episode with Kari in it.
 
2014-02-13 10:01:27 PM
MOAR KARI
 
2014-02-13 10:16:54 PM

desertgeek: In the evidence he presents, I find many holes. In the imgur link posted up thread, he notes things that he claims Mythbusters stole from him. Well, as iron de havilland noted; the guy might as well sue Top Gear for the same camera tricks. Also, TG did a plane vs car challenge and they showed a map of their routes! And I know that episode (as well as episodes with similar races and maps) aired in the USA on BBC America. But he's not going to sue the BBC, is he?


Forgot to mention saw this exact thing...on a cartoon from the 40's.  Tortoise vs Hair slow and steady vs quick acceleration and poor attention span.  They showed a map with the route the animals ran....I think this guy owes Disney some money!
 
2014-02-13 11:09:24 PM
Hello Fark --

This is the fat IP trolling Douchenozzle who created the series, This vs That...and is accusing the Discovery Channel and Mythbusters of taking work, ideas and content that belong to me.

Let me begin by saying: In my defense, I've also lost at the Emmys 13 times, as well... and if you could see the back of my head in that photo of me in the t-shirt, you'd also see that I'm beginning to show signs of a bald spot. Also, my cholesterol is too high.

Would you guys be up for a Google Hangout? I'd love to answer all your questions LIVE.

No holds barred. I'll answer all your questions...

You tell me when... and I'll be there.

Also, I could go fark myself.

It's up to you.

Best,
Jon
 
2014-02-13 11:10:18 PM
I tried reading this "article". Really, I did.

What a pretentious, self-important, whiny arsehole.

I'm sorry I clicked and gave this guy any traffic.
 
2014-02-13 11:11:59 PM

desertgeek: To me, this guy's issue is more sour grapes than anything else. He's pissed that his show wasn't picked up by Discovery and that the show they did choose to buy is successful while he's stuck with a web show. He might be able to prove some of his arguments, but many of them are really grasping at straws.


The other point is that not only did he make his pitch after Mythbusters was already wildly successful, but his pitch was pure crap.  According to the link posted earlier, he vacillated between priding himself on his independence yet practically begging for Discovery to give him money to improve the show to make it mainstream.

That ain't how life works bud. You need to prove that you have a product that is new, exciting, and viable.  Pitching an idea that is already "done", and has no proven record of viability isn't going to work.

End result: go back to the drawing board rather than obstructing Discovery from airing more episodes that share coincidental similarities to your own.

I don't think he even has a good argument that his "ideas" were stolen.  Even if written down, ideas are only ideas until a real product is made out of them.  You can't fraud a patent or copyright if it isn't already in the system.
 
2014-02-13 11:13:08 PM
Aussie_As:
I also agree with the farker who reminded us that the tattooed chick who was not much of a science tech who was on the early eps was also distractingly hot. In my view anyway.

Scottie Chapman.

I'll be in my bunk :)
 
2014-02-13 11:18:18 PM
"Only my brilliant ideas are capable of saving Mythbusters, so Discovery stole them from me, and this scheduling change proves it."
 
2014-02-13 11:59:46 PM

thisvsthatshow: Hello Fark --

....

No holds barred. I'll answer all your questions...

You tell me when... and I'll be there.

Also, I could go fark myself.

It's up to you.

Best,
Jon


Well I can't speak for everyone here but I don't think many will be taking up your offer Jon. We've already made up our minds about you. It's Fark. It's what happens.
 
2014-02-14 12:07:55 AM
www.gotceleb.com

and

i.imgur.com
 
2014-02-14 12:10:13 AM
Because this author totally believes they're the first and only person to ever have the idea of examining myths about sex?

Waaah!  Boo hoo!
 
2014-02-14 03:49:17 AM

Shahab: From what I read he was in negotiations with Discovery for them to buy his series, they wanted to buy the rights to his series without bringing him on board to be a part of it. He said no so Discovery went ahead and just used his ideas. If you look beyond the linked article there is actually a lot of proof.

Also, does anyone here really want to support the network that brought us ghost hunting reality shows?


As apposed to supporting the guy that couldn't even get on that network?

Can we just put both in a big pot and see how long it takes to boil the oil?
 
2014-02-14 04:45:24 AM
Dude has no chance in court and he knows otherwise he would have sued already.  He is just trying to make a big enough stink so Discovery will pay him to shut up.


Seriously you cannot trademark or copyright what he claims they stole, the production techniques he claims as proof have been used for many years.

In short they guy is pissed they would not buy his show and let him host it so he is gonna try to screw with discovery as much as he can.
 
2014-02-14 06:48:53 AM
Absolutely hilarious that the pathetic guy shows up right here to defend himself only to find that one gives a shart.

/have never seen Myth busters
 
2014-02-14 08:50:52 AM

Far Cough: Absolutely hilarious that the pathetic guy shows up right here to defend himself only to find that one gives a shart.

/have never seen Myth busters


It was a decent show up until the first time they censored information.
 
2014-02-14 09:57:04 AM

thisvsthatshow: Hello Fark --

This is the fat IP trolling Douchenozzle who created the series, This vs That...and is accusing the Discovery Channel and Mythbusters of taking work, ideas and content that belong to me.

Let me begin by saying: In my defense, I've also lost at the Emmys 13 times, as well... and if you could see the back of my head in that photo of me in the t-shirt, you'd also see that I'm beginning to show signs of a bald spot. Also, my cholesterol is too high.

Would you guys be up for a Google Hangout? I'd love to answer all your questions LIVE.

No holds barred. I'll answer all your questions...

You tell me when... and I'll be there.

Also, I could go fark myself.

It's up to you.

Best,
Jon


http://the-gadgeteer.com/2011/11/05/this-vs-that-new-tv-show-for-gee ks /

Seems you had some sort of falling out since then?
 
2014-02-14 11:21:40 AM

InterruptingQuirk: Far Cough: Absolutely hilarious that the pathetic guy shows up right here to defend himself only to find that one gives a shart.

/have never seen Myth busters

It was a decent show up until the first time they censored information.


I enjoyed watching an episode where they had to stop and talk about how they accidentally shot a cannonball into someone's house.
 
2014-02-14 11:26:54 AM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: MrBallou: Came for this. Only 3rd post in. I knew you wouldn't disappoint, SH.

[img837.imageshack.us image 650x330]


If you like that, try this.


Sorry. I was too, umm, "busy" to reply. Then I fell asleep.
 
2014-02-14 11:54:57 AM

juvandy: joeflood: Science is all about repeatable results.

LOL excellent point

This guy sounds like a douche.  One of the commenters on the original article has it right- if he had a legal leg to stand on, he wouldn't be whining on the internet.  Instead, he'd be making out like a fat cat in a courtroom.


If you read the article, he says that "US copyright and intellectual property laws are not applicable outside the US".

I agree this guy sounds a little whiny, but I would love for all of you to see some of your work appropriated by a giant corporation with no recompense. Even more, I would love for you to biatch about it online so that I can say 'Haw Haw' to you.

Why doesn't Discovery simply re-title the episode and release it?

img.fark.net
 
2014-02-14 11:56:00 AM

GameSprocket: InterruptingQuirk: Far Cough: Absolutely hilarious that the pathetic guy shows up right here to defend himself only to find that one gives a shart.

/have never seen Myth busters

It was a decent show up until the first time they censored information.

I enjoyed watching an episode where they had to stop and talk about how they accidentally shot a cannonball into someone's house.


"Don't try this at home, we're professionals"
 
2014-02-14 01:06:04 PM

InterruptingQuirk: GameSprocket: InterruptingQuirk: Far Cough: Absolutely hilarious that the pathetic guy shows up right here to defend himself only to find that one gives a shart.

/have never seen Myth busters

It was a decent show up until the first time they censored information.

I enjoyed watching an episode where they had to stop and talk about how they accidentally shot a cannonball into someone's house.

"Don't try this at home, we're professionals"


This. The best way to make sure idiots "don't try this at home" is to not tell them how to do it in the first place.
 
2014-02-14 01:20:21 PM

ArcadianRefugee: InterruptingQuirk: GameSprocket: InterruptingQuirk: Far Cough: Absolutely hilarious that the pathetic guy shows up right here to defend himself only to find that one gives a shart.

/have never seen Myth busters

It was a decent show up until the first time they censored information.

I enjoyed watching an episode where they had to stop and talk about how they accidentally shot a cannonball into someone's house.

"Don't try this at home, we're professionals"

This. The best way to make sure idiots "don't try this at home" is to not tell them how to do it in the first place.


That was my problem with the show to begin with is that they would not tell us how to do some things "on the advice of counsel/producers/fbi" If want to know how to build a neutron bomb, I should be allowed to know how to build a neutron bomb!
 
2014-02-14 02:13:37 PM

skinbubble: [www.gotceleb.com image 560x314]

and

[i.imgur.com image 480x318]


Two images that capture the exact moments when some of us fell in love with Kari.  ;-)
 
2014-02-14 02:45:06 PM

Clint_Torres: juvandy: joeflood: Science is all about repeatable results.

LOL excellent point

This guy sounds like a douche.  One of the commenters on the original article has it right- if he had a legal leg to stand on, he wouldn't be whining on the internet.  Instead, he'd be making out like a fat cat in a courtroom.

If you read the article, he says that "US copyright and intellectual property laws are not applicable outside the US".

I agree this guy sounds a little whiny, but I would love for all of you to see some of your work appropriated by a giant corporation with no recompense. Even more, I would love for you to biatch about it online so that I can say 'Haw Haw' to you.

Why doesn't Discovery simply re-title the episode and release it?

[img.fark.net image 533x594]


So they stole his video and used it without permission?  Is that what you are saying?  Nope, he claims they stole his idea.  Facts, general concepts, basic ideas and questions are not subject to copyright.  If you search Amazon for "Laws of Attraction", it brings up over 12,000 items.  Hardly an original topic in fiction or non-fiction.

FACT: Anybody that prefaces a bunch of statements withFACT: is probably someone that can be ignored for various reasons.

It pains me to be on the side of any sort of Big Media company, but that Hotchkiss guy seems like he's simply pissed nobody will give him money and make him famous.
 
2014-02-14 03:33:16 PM
Even famous on Fark.
 
2014-02-14 04:17:59 PM
"Mythbusters" better not air their "It's 5 O'Clock Somewhere" episode because I invented that shiat last year!
 
2014-02-14 04:19:42 PM

joeflood: Clint_Torres: juvandy: joeflood: Science is all about repeatable results.

LOL excellent point

This guy sounds like a douche.  One of the commenters on the original article has it right- if he had a legal leg to stand on, he wouldn't be whining on the internet.  Instead, he'd be making out like a fat cat in a courtroom.

If you read the article, he says that "US copyright and intellectual property laws are not applicable outside the US".

I agree this guy sounds a little whiny, but I would love for all of you to see some of your work appropriated by a giant corporation with no recompense. Even more, I would love for you to biatch about it online so that I can say 'Haw Haw' to you.

Why doesn't Discovery simply re-title the episode and release it?

[img.fark.net image 533x594]

So they stole his video and used it without permission?  Is that what you are saying?  Nope, he claims they stole his idea.  Facts, general concepts, basic ideas and questions are not subject to copyright.  If you search Amazon for "Laws of Attraction", it brings up over 12,000 items.  Hardly an original topic in fiction or non-fiction.

FACT: Anybody that prefaces a bunch of statements withFACT: is probably someone that can be ignored for various reasons.

It pains me to be on the side of any sort of Big Media company, but that Hotchkiss guy seems like he's simply pissed nobody will give him money and make him famous.


Fair enough.
 
2014-02-14 05:58:27 PM

joeflood: Clint_Torres: juvandy: joeflood: ....

FACT: Anybody that prefaces a bunch of statements with FACT: is probably someone that can be ignored for various reasons.


Also, anyone who repeatedly refers to their notes, scribbles and planning document as their 'bible' a bunch of times also can generally be steered clear of.
 
Displayed 141 of 141 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report