Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 386 posts

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#281

Post by ryguytilidie »

lucisferre wrote: post #227
onemorepassword wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That looks pretty much open and shut, as if using a vague DMCA in itself wasn't already enough of a hint. It's not even a rip-off. The basic pattern for the icons is insanely generic, and the execution is clearly different. The color scheme is a very common one. It bears a resemblance as much as one black leather shoe bears a resemblance to another black leather shoe. It's not even worth making a passing remark about…

Give me a break. One single misguided DMCA notice does not make one a copyright troll .

So what is the threshold? Two made up DMCA notices? One hundred made up DMCA notices?

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#282

Post by likeclockwork »

mrmaddog wrote: post #87

And here's a reply from Allan: https://news.layervault.com/stories/1992-layervault-whats-up... Looks like the pitchforks are out over on HN. It was pretty straightforward. Our reaction was "Cool, a flat UI theme" to "Wait, this looks familiar" to "Wait, are those our illustrations?". I contacted the designmodo people over email, because that's the right way to handle this. The owner was being stubborn at first and re…

Wow, I never looked at DN before and I don't think I will start now. In that thread they come across as thuggish scumbags who don't care about evidence and believe that anyone should be able to use the legal system to bulldoze competitors doing "similar" work.

Also, this Allan guy whoever he is, is dripping with self-importance.

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#283

Post by bkirch »

ender7 wrote: post #201

For the lazy, here's a summary of the claims that LV/DN is making: Some icons appear to be heavily inspired by LV. Here are three icons (circled) from Flat-UI: http://i.imgur.com/xDDULcG.png You can see that the gears and news icons do bear some similarity to LV's versions: http://dribbble.com/shots/800428-LayerVault-icon-set-for-del... and http://imgur.com/rli5IVU (the latter via http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=…

1) "GOOD ARTISTS COPY, GREAT ARTISTS STEAL"- Picasso

      -Most often done by... Jonathan Ive
See examples here... http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Arts/Arts_/site_furnitur...

2) Has anyone visited LayerVault's site?

Does anyone think that they invented all of the styling, color schemes, magnifying effects, icon styling out of thin air?

Anyone seen google do something similar? (looks waaaaay better than LV old site BTW)

3) If you wanted to shame someone, the best way to do so would have been a blog post...

See OXO v.s. Quirky http://goo.gl/Zccse

4) It's impossible for an idea to be truly unique/novel. They are always tangents/leaps based on a previous discoveries or insight.

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#284

Post by pifflesnort »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #277
MonsterCritic wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's add some google colors in this comparison http://cl.ly/NO8C

Your point being…? If it were ONLY the colors, or ONLY the look and feel of the widgets (which, come on, are almost exactly the same as well), or ONLY the icons… different story entirely. But it's the SUM of all of those things.

> But it's the SUM of all of those things.

This is not how copyright works.

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#285

Post by TillE »

etchalon wrote: post #275
hhw wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They misused the DMCA because they did not own the copyright of the content they filed a DMCA against, plain and simple, and they made specific claims in the DMCA otherwise. Just because the icons were similar does not make that a copyright violation. LV either abused the DMCA out of ignorance or dishonesty. There is no other possibility here, and they deserve every bit of negative sentiment that has resulted against…

They believe they do. So it was neither ignorance nor dishonesty. _You_ don't think they do.

Again, you and LayerVault don't seem to understand copyright.

Here's an example. There's a famous iPhone game called Fruit Ninja. There's another game called Veggie Samurai. Total ripoff in every imaginable way, but completely legal.

Copyright means you can't make direct copies or derivative works of my stuff. It doesn't mean you're not allowed copy all my ideas.

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#286

Post by mrgoldenbrown »

etchalon wrote: post #259
pifflesnort wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you understand the DMCA. It is NOT a legal tool for this type of situation. The DMCA ("Digitam Millenium COPYRIGHT Act") provides the take-down mechanism as a means to take down copyright infringing content, and in exchange gives the hosts of that content a safe-harbor[1]. So when people say "they don't own turquoise", those people are correct. LayerVault does not and can not hold a copyright on turquoi…

And LV isn't going after them for turquoise, but for specific illustrations, which are copyrightable. You're jumbling what LV actually did with the simplification of what they did.

AFAIK, the DMCA notice did not list specific images. Have you found the specific images that were copied?

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#287

Post by pifflesnort »

lowboy wrote: post #273
pifflesnort wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is some ... facile ... logic. If you murdered someone in 1995, would you be a murderer?

Murder is too loaded of a act to serve as a good example for this discussion, IMO, but just the once? I would describe myself as someone who had murdered, but not a murderer. There's an active/repetitive component to being described as an *-er. As I replied to electic, how would you feel if I described myself as a singer upon meeting someone, having only sang for 3 minutes out of the decades of my life? "Oh, hi, I'm…

> There's an active/repetitive component ...

The persistent/active component is in having the personal constitution necessary to engaged in the action in question. The type of person, for instance, who files a false DMCA take-down request -- censoring another person's speech -- without understanding or appreciating the ethical and legal implications of what they are doing.

"Repository unavailable due to DMCA takedown" -- https://github.com/designmodo/Flat-UI

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#288

Post by dangrossman »

integraton wrote: post #267
lucisferre wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Give me a break. One single misguided DMCA notice does not make one a copyright troll .

This is a legal issue. It's not a joke. It looks like LayerVault's founder turned quickly to legal bullying in a situation where he apparently has little to no justification. Just responding to and dealing with a DMCA notice like this would cost hundreds or thousands of dollars in attorney fees. People who drag others into expensive, unwarranted legal situations are a blight on the entrepreneurial community.

> Just responding to and dealing with a DMCA notice like this would cost hundreds or thousands of dollars in attorney fees

No, responding to and dealing with a DMCA notice takes 5 minutes and a couple keystrokes. You send a counternotice, a simple e-mail you can copy and paste from any number of examples. There are no attorneys fees until there's an actual lawsuit, and there's never going to be one here.

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#289

Post by dangrossman »

deelowe wrote: post #172
alexpenny wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are the icons in question. http://i.imgur.com/xDDULcG.png Also, the Flat-UI guy also copied other artists on dribbble. http://cl.ly/image/3Q181w0b1u2K From http://drbl.in/eXkk , and http://drbl.in/gmsD I'm not saying these are in copyright violation, merely examples he has copied prior work.

s/copied/used as inspiration/ Copyright means you literally copied the design. Are you maybe confusing copyright and trademark? With trademark, you can get in trouble for creating brand confusion, which has a more to do with the look and feel than the actual copy.

Copyright also grants the exclusive right to create derivative works. Using another work as the basis of your own, even with zero direct copying, can be an infringement of that right. I doubt that happened here, and proving it would be near-impossible, but we should be cognizant of what copyright actually is.

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#290

Post by integraton »

dangrossman wrote: post #288
integraton wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a legal issue. It's not a joke. It looks like LayerVault's founder turned quickly to legal bullying in a situation where he apparently has little to no justification. Just responding to and dealing with a DMCA notice like this would cost hundreds or thousands of dollars in attorney fees. People who drag others into expensive, unwarranted legal situations are a blight on the entrepreneurial community.

> Just responding to and dealing with a DMCA notice like this would cost hundreds or thousands of dollars in attorney fees No, responding to and dealing with a DMCA notice takes 5 minutes and a couple keystrokes. You send a counternotice, a simple e-mail you can copy and paste from any number of examples. There are no attorneys fees until there's an actual lawsuit, and there's never going to be one here.

Legal issues should be dealt with by attorneys, period. Mishandled legal issues can, and frequently do, become very messy and expensive.
Post reply on HN