Probably close to 100%. He builds things from nature. And the only editing is cutting video. There's no audio mixing.

There’s an interesting video digging into the way these copycats are fake too [1] - if you watch them you can often see things like excavator tracks that haven’t been hidden well enough, and they found somebody involved who talked about how the buildings are built by teams of people on leased land and then just abandoned when the video is done…

But I think they do cater to a different audience. You need a fairly long attention span to watch the real, not-faked Primitive Technologies videos, whereas the copycats not so much. And the real channels is always pretty interesting, whereas the copycats are all the same thing, so they’re probably not really taking that many views away. But yeah, they should definitely have to come up with less similar names to the real thing!

1. https://youtube.com/watch?v=Hvk63LADbFc

You seem to be against this idea of 'copycating' but our society has put a lot of thought into what's Trademark-able and what's not.

In particular, his name is incredibly descriptive - it's just a plain description of what the thing is: primitive technology. We specifically disallow that when it comes to trademarking because it would basically give you an extremely wide monopoly right away.

Consider that "Corn Flakes" is not trademarked because it's just a literal description of what the food is. It would be dumb if people couldn't call their product "corn flakes". Compare that to say a product called "Cheerios" which is just a made up term, and it would be very unjustifiable for people to copy this.

> SOE

Do you mean "seo"?