I would sue the crap out of them.

THISSSSSSS. COPYRIGHT STRIKE THESE *BLEEPING NOISES*

This! Abby and everyone else they've stolen photos from should strike them into oblivion! They aren't even going on good faith, they are pedalling false trash and given who they are stealing from, they know it!

YES! YESSS!!! BLOODY FUC*ING HELL, YES! Kick their flabby as*es!

Yes, get a lawyer and start the process. They stole your work and I think they misrepresented you?

I definitely agree with you.

Perhaps they will think twice the next time, before using someone else's work.

Yes! They should not be allowed to use your photos without your permission to spin this hogwash. Go after them Abbey!

Yeah, please go after their asses with everything you've got, I'd donate money to that cause

so the Ripley's of KZfaq?

That would require surface level research and caring about people

what do you mean "from"? obviously from the factory of plastic artificial wigs. **obviously.** /s

They obviously just took some pruning shears to the hair orchard, silly. Hair grows on trees like spaghetti and money. Smh…

So true. And fact is...I never wondered about this myself, before delving deeper into well researched content about history and fashion. It is not an obvious, well known fact in the general public, so it needs to be brought up, when making dedicated content about it. Very disappointing, indeed.

@@raraavis7782 I assume it has a deep link to colonialism. I know human hair was used. So probably from explanation. And I have heard that Horse hair was used too. I studied Anthropology but I vague know something about wigs and wig stuff/ fashion etc. I know enough to know exploitation was most definitely a part of wigs and fashion.

Thanks for letting us know!

I thought it was a political party , the Wigs ..

@@ah5721 That party has a different spelling. Whigs.

After reading "is attributed it to British parliment member" my brain immediately went to Walpole.

The OED also has a 1772 reference from G. A. Stevens' Songs Comic & Satyrical "Ye big Wigs of Gresham some Nostrum compound, To keep our Heads clear and preserve our Hearts sound."

Let's not forget the fact that Bernadette set a part of the rip- off dress on fire or the fact that Loepsie blasted Amazon for selling a knockoff version of her bangs while using a picture of her.

I take their stuff with a grain of salt already but now that stealing is added to the nonsense I'm boycotting! Thanks for putting it that way- straight up.

What about going to it only long enough to report it?

Can we bump this comment higher?

@@moxiebombshell I believe that if you pause it immediately, then it reads like it wasn’t viewed completely. YT looks at viewer retention, so the faster you click away from something, the less “points” (idk) the video gets for viewership. So if you go there just to report it and nothing more, it should be okay.

So they're just stealing from everyone, both good and bad sources o.O

💀💀

Yeah… I mean, I think that’s mostly obvious. They aren’t always wrong, no, but they are doing quick bits for history. And they try to keep it light mostly, so I personally don’t see anything wrong with it if you don’t want to deep dive. Wish Abby hadn’t made the Columbus comment at the beginning. I get it, but I also have lots of mixed feelings about straight demonizing anyone, even historic figures. Just feels weird

They probably didn't get the rights to it, either.

Oh my god. I cannot believe they used LemonCholy’s image!!! I recall watching the video when it came out and it was my favorite video for a while! Ugh. Weird history.

IIRC the original artist is janellefeng (that's her id on lots of social media too I think 🤔)

You dont need a lawyer to do this. KZfaq allows you to send a cease and desist automatically and you can claim sections of the video so that they either have to clip out the part or swap the image and reupload. Literally no reason to retain a lawyer until they refuse to change it twice at which time youtube has it set up so that the claimant has to sue them. However, all they would need to do would be to cut or alter the image enough to justify fair use and then there's nothing that can be done. It's arguable that just having the speech overlaid onto it is enough to justify fair use and as this channel isn't a massive corporation, youtube will not bend over backwards to abuse copyright to pull it down.

@@danielbroome5690 normally I (admittedly, caveat, not a lawyer) would agree that "providing commentary on an image" would provide some protection ...however, they are NOT providing commentary on the image, nor using it as an actual, accurate illustration... They're straight up lying about the content of and meaning behind the images (since as Abby notes, those aren't wigs! They're from her book about historical styling of ACTUAL HAIR, not wigs!), while also failing to cite the source of the image or credit the models or photographer. Seeing as I'm sure their channel is trying to make money off these clickbait videos, one can also pretty easily argue their use isn't purely "educational" in intent, but quite commercial. That all would, I'm fairly certain, considerably harm in various degrees and ways, an argument for "fair use". Again, not a lawyer - but from being in artistic and fanwork circles, I aware of what Fair Use was primarily intended to cover, and the most legally defensible forms. And this... would not easily pass those thresholds. A clear cut case of Fair Use might be one of the following: - providing commentary on/directly related to the work in question (see: "real x reacts to" videos, reviews, debates about content e.g. "Well MY research says...", that sort of thing); legal reasoning being along the lines of providing allowance of context for free speech/intellectual discourse about the work. This can and often does include parodies, under theory that parodies are a commentary on the original I some way, though parodies published for profit can be a delicate legal balance (as it was for the author of the satire of Gone With The Wind called "The Wind Done Gone"), though more on that in a moment. - using small portions of the work for valid educational purposes (usually seen in contexts like teachers photocopying something as a handout for students in a class, quoting research in an essay, or trying to educationally extrapolate on the work or a related subject, e.g. if this were a video about hairstyles through the ages and someone presented it in the CORRECT context, especially with citation, that would be an easier argument for fair use); legal reasoning would be to support intellectual discourse and education. (Can be undermined if using too much of a work, though two or three photos from a whole book like that probably wouldn't be an inherent issue its own right it also isn't an inherent protection, but rather very context dependent) - it also EXTREMELY helps ones case if the derivative work including components of it, is not produced with primarily "commercial" interests in mind (e.g. Archive of Our Own is able to host fan fiction as well as they do with so few USA restrictions as they do, in part because the organization that runs it is a registered Non Profit in the USA, and is transparently run as such, not even accepting advertisements to avoid the commercial entanglements that other popular places to post fanfic, such as fanfiction.net or LiveJournal, had run afoul of - you're not even allowed to promote for profit things directly from your profile or posts to AO3, that's how seriously they take it). The legal argument for this is generally: supporting artistic and intellectual freedom, WHILE balancing the (mostly monetary in this sense) interests of the original copyright holders. -another mitigating factor is whether the derivative "harms the reputation" of the original, and though this is often more of a concern with trademark issues I think (e.g. the band Aqua I think briefly had Mattel go after them for the use of the Barbie name in the song "Barbie Girl", which...is uh. Obviously a satirical use of the term in context, with lines like "you can brush my hair/undress me everywhere" and "I'm a barbie girl/ in a world/life in plastic/it's fantastic" etc and talks of "fantasy" like it's clearly using Barbie as a metaphor for certain aspects of modern culture... but Mattel and the like often aren't known for their sense of humor)... defamation can also be a thing that complicates things legally for the user. See, the Truth is a defense against defamation, and Opinion can be too as its subjective, but if you're not TELLING the truth, and you're clearly framing it as a Fact and not Opinion... Yeah. "Weird History" is on not the most stable of Fair use grounds here I think. Because to recap: - They aren't discussing the images' ACTUAL context and in fact are pulling them completely out of and away from their real context; this can hurt the argument that it was "educational" let alone an actual commentary on the original - with the misrepresented context, and the relative easy access but iffy citation quality of today's searchable databases for images that are so readily available to the public, I feel like a clever enough lawyer could argue misrepresenting it that way could cause audience confusion about the source and original context of the images, and therefore be damaging to the reputation of the creators or models of the images, and for instance, have unjust negative impact on Ms Cox's book's reputation or sales. - the fact that they are very likely profiting or attempting to profit from these videos is also not favorable to them, ESPECIALLY having reproduced the images without notice, permission, or credit. To use it in what ultimately is a commercial product that was not given permission for that use, can much more easily run afoul of the photographer's copyright, the models' release agreements, etc. Also worth noting: Abby asserts one of those images is not "easy to find", i.e. not easily available just from the public internet, which indicates it was a very much non accidental, wilful use of a copyrighted image. Which... then went uncredited AND misrepresented, in a video that was likely monetized or intended to be monetized. So idk, it's not an easy Fair use case to make on their part, and I'm pretty sure Abby would have good justification to copyright claim the images in that specific section, and that KZfaq policies would appropriately apply there. At absolute minimum, it is justified to require them to remove the images or correct the misinformation about them including lack of citation. But the lack of permission from the models in particular for this use is another factor that I don't think The WH channel realized they should be concerned about but very much should be...

I don't think Weird History even considers themselves satire...

Not even satire. They claim accuracy.

@@adorabell4253 That just makes them more dangerous

I draw parallels with Weird History videos and the video factories that churn out DIY, hacks, and cooking videos that don’t produce the same results in real life. The goal is to attract and generate views for ad revenue. I suspect that negative reactions by informed people just increase that traffic a little. There is some irony that Selwyn’s predilection for the macabre might have appreciated the outrageous claims of this video.

Weird History is directly connected to the website Ranker, which churns out listicles with Reddit-style "upvote" mechanics within them. In fact, the videos are direct copy-pastes of those listicles. While I liked browsing that site when I was younger (and by younger I mean earlier teens), setting foot there rn feels like i'm in a clickbait cesspool. Weird History probably isn't the only channel they have. Ranker has a variety of "newsletters" in various topics, and Weird History is one of them. So we may encounter other clickbaity bs, watch out.

My face when I saw a comment on that video going "they should show these videos in school!" was...yeah...🙃 😅

I do think their videos are mean to comedy not informative.

KZfaq will take action if creators steal copyrighted images. I know of at least one channel that they deleted over this, and that particular use of images wasn't nearly as egregious as stealing from your book. I don't know how the process works, but it could be an easy fix to them and their idiocy.

@@AbbyCox During school my history club actually showed one of their videos. I was very mortified and confused the entire time lol.

I guess I'm glad I found this channel, had no idea weird history was garbage LOL. I'm late 20s. I'm embarrassed

There are a lot of excellent channels, but you do have to dig for them.

@@kathyjohnson2043 can you recommend some?

@@orangentage I like AlternateHistoryHub, because, before he explains his alternate history theory, he thoroughly explains the circumstances that lead to the history we have today. I also appreciate his research as it seems to be not only well done but also done with recent papers.

@@orangentage Yes, but when I tried to type them in here, I ended up loosing the list. I'll type it out and then cut and paste.

Lindsay Holiday is a good one if you like royal history. Mostly European but she does branch out to other areas of the world sometimes.

Maybe bubonic plague was spread by desperate men and lame rats? How can you know for sure? WERE YOU THERE?

Right?? Like, no, it literally did not. Was it common in Europe? Yes, certainly. But Black Plague wasn't called THE Plague for nothing. And it was a HELL of a lot easier to contract Bubonic Plague than it's ever been to contract syphilis.

Does WH think _everyone_ was raw dogging everyone so hard syphilis spread as far and wide as _the Plague?_ That was a weird insinuation…

Nah, since I’m using their video to make my own money. What I am doing is fair use though…

@@AbbyCox seriously, copyright strike them This is not okay and it valid grounds to sue

Even if you only demand that they read the book - on camera - as payment lol.

@@AbbyCox You should honestly. Or at *least* email them and ask that everything they used of yours without your permission gets removed from the video. What they’re doing is not okay and if you don’t react they’ll just continue to do it. I’d personally be petty enough to comment on the video asking them to stop stealing your photos and to especially stop using them while spreading incorrect information so everyone could see how bs of a channel they are 🙃 You know we’d all go and like it

@@AbbyCox The 'Good Folks' ☆cough SARCASM!☆ at Weird History. Have released another video yesterday called the 'History of Fashion'. & all I can say about it is *WOOF!* It’s a complete & utter dogs breakfast of misinformation from start to finish! 🤮 I'm a layperson when it comes to the history of fashion. But even I know that 80% of what they said in their video is *BULLSHIT!* Just from the basic knowledge of history I learned in high school. 🤦‍♀️ The video including everyone at the Catherine dé Medci Time Travel Society's. 'Favorite' historical fashion subject - corsetry, & yes they do go there *AGAIN* with the claims about whale bone. 🐋🦴 In fact they make whale bone & it's use in ladies garments, a running joke throughout the video. 😒 You seriously need to summon the Ladies, & rip their latest monstrosity a new one.

This is a valid point. Weird History did use other people's work, some of which is copyrighted. Did they get written permission to use those works? Where is the boundaries of fair use? Weird History don't make documentaries.

@@bcase5328 In this case, unfortunately, educational video (even if it's inaccurate) likely more than covers their fair use of this copyrighted material.

🤣

Amen

May her soul find peace

sobbing😭(πwπ)

To cover up syphilis? Seems to be a thing for WH

Interesting thought... Do you mean that like the person finding photos thought they were somehow doing a good thing by using images from (among others) Abby Cox since they are well-researched, quality examples of the subject -- but then the images were misused / misapplied by the editor to a terrible script? Because I could see that as a possibility

@@moxiebombshell exactly! Abby does point out that some of those images are not easy to find. So someone had to really go looking for the sort of photos they wanted, not just the first Google search results. There was effort here (with only some of the images I'll admit). I suspect that the photos were handed over to people who didn't want to put in that same effort.

Honestly, I would kinda love if they just owned that they're the Onion of history, would 10/10 laugh my ass off

I doubt this would hold up in court. It more than likely falls under fair use due to it being a transformative, educational video.

@@danielbroome5690 but they didn't source her. At all. They just showed it and didn't say who it was and where it was from.

This comment had me in the first half (er, first sentence) not gonna lie. Then we got real and I love it. Fuck research/art/any thieves! When you can protect your work, you 100000% should with the full extent of your ability. Especially when other smaller content creators are equally being ripped off, and by terrible quality, bottom of the barrel, theives!

Weird History doesn't present itself as satire, and ignorant people absolutely believe it.

What’s the source for this? Could you share?

Ok - so the googling I did all claim this but no one is showing the proof - do you know a primary source for this? (Genuinely curious)

I just figured it was a misspelling of Whig.

@@lucie4185 That’s an interesting thought. Maybe it was meant as a pun potshot at members of the Whig Party. Who were in power for the majority of the 18th century in the UK.

@@AbbyCox I've tried posting the links I found for you over a dozen times. But KZfaq won't alow me to do so. 😡🤬 Sorry Abby. ☹

Yeah- what's worse is that they're ambiguous about whether they're satirical or actually believe what they're saying.

Totally agreed! The LGBTQ + community LOVES US SOME ABBY!!!❤️🧡💛💚💜💙🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏳️‍⚧️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️🏴‍☠️(Yes,pirates are people too!)

I thought it was a reference to the political party too - the Whigs

If it helps, the algorithm thinks I *love* weird history cause they are always showing me their content and I'm like "no my eyes they're burning please make it stop *clicks* whyyy did i do this to myselfffff*