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

331–340 of 386 posts

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#331

Post by stephen_g »

dzlobin wrote: post #92
andyl wrote: post #63

I learned one thing: I will never use LayerVault's service, and discourage anyone I know from using it.

How about you look into the issue rather than making bold comments with no basis. https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309346292902014976 https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309350351054716929

This guy deserves the negative opinions - his DMCA request is completly invalid (he just gives the URL or their front page an no specific illustrations he claims are infringing), and the images that were removed from flat UI after the request are somewhat similar but not at all an infringement.

Unless he gives some solid proof, he does not deserve the Benoit of the doubt.

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#332

Post by ben0x539 »

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.

5 minutes and then 10 days until github is allowed to act on the counternotice?

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#333

Post by alexpenny »

chc wrote: post #327
alexpenny wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False analogy. Comparing design work to carbohydrates is a thin argument. Here is the definition of copy.. "A thing made to be similar or identical to another." The worked linked to was not original. It is similar and identical to other designers work.

Can you show the earlier work to which these are identical? If that is the case, I will retract what I said. But I don't think it's the case.

The links are in the original comment. Isn't that what we've been talking about?

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#334

Post by mattsfrey »

jacalata wrote: post #324
lowboy wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read it. LV is engaging in one act of trolling at the moment, and they have the "personal constitution necessary to engage" in said trolling. No arguments there, and I don't condone what they're doing. But having the constitution to do an act doesn't mean one is a repeated doer of that act. Has LV actively trolled, or tried to censor people's speech in the past? If not, they shouldn't be described as patent trolls,…

And describing someone as an x doesn't always mean they are a repeated doer of the x-act. Eg, dictator: do you think only someone who was a dictator of multiple countries can be legitimately called that? If you say, as you did for murderer, that 'this example is too loaded', then you are recognising that the reaction is different for acts of different impact, and therefore your analogy of 'singer' is irrelevant until…

Labeling sure is a tricky business. There are certain lines you cross in life though-- you get locked up, you live the rest of your life as an "ex-con" to most of society. Speaking for myself but I think also many others in this community, if you troll, whether you are later considered an "ex-troll" or just a "troll" doesn't matter, you trolled. It's an egregious offense that was foolishly committed and they will always regret it now, as they should.

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#335

Post by sharedliberty »

bkirch wrote: post #283
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…

Picasso never said that. Jobs misquoted. But the real quote from T.S. Eliot is better: “Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different. The good poet welds his theft into a whole of feeling which is unique, utterly different than that from which it is torn.”

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#336

Post by milkshakes »

alexpenny wrote: post #317
milkshakes wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do understand that none of the examples you have posted are in fact examples of copyright violation right?

Yes I didn't say they were in copyright violation. Here is the definition of copy.. "A thing made to be similar or identical to another." The worked linked to was not original. It is similar and identical to other designers work.

Right. The linked commit that is the subject of this thread is a DMCA takedown notice, which is a legal instrument designed to allow holders of copyrights to prevent their copyrighted materials from being distributed. Setting aside the merits of the DMCA, it has nothing to do with any definition of "copy" (yours, Oxford's, or Wikipedia's) at all. It is a remedy for copyright infrigement, which, again, is a legal term with a very specific definition[1]. No matter how creatively you define the word "copy", designmodo's actions simply are not equivalent to "copyright infringement" by any legal definition.

[1]http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/501

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#337

Post by alexpenny »

milkshakes wrote: post #336
alexpenny wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes I didn't say they were in copyright violation. Here is the definition of copy.. "A thing made to be similar or identical to another." The worked linked to was not original. It is similar and identical to other designers work.

Right. The linked commit that is the subject of this thread is a DMCA takedown notice, which is a legal instrument designed to allow holders of copyrights to prevent their copyrighted materials from being distributed. Setting aside the merits of the DMCA, it has nothing to do with any definition of "copy" (yours, Oxford's, or Wikipedia's) at all. It is a remedy for copyright infrigement , which, again, is a legal ter…

I'm not defending the DMCA. Did I mention it? I pointed out that DM copied other works I saw previously on dribbble. Adding information to the discussion, that spawned more threads.

"What exactly is the point you're trying to make?"

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#338

Post by escaped_hn »

largesse wrote: post #75

Could a site have a policy where if you issue a DMCA takedown for something on the site they drop your content and ban you? It's sort of like the logic of GPL.

I like that idea. The License to the OPUS codec uses it. If you sue another user of the opus codec, you must stop using opus. :)

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#339

Post by milkshakes »

alexpenny wrote: post #337
milkshakes wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. The linked commit that is the subject of this thread is a DMCA takedown notice, which is a legal instrument designed to allow holders of copyrights to prevent their copyrighted materials from being distributed. Setting aside the merits of the DMCA, it has nothing to do with any definition of "copy" (yours, Oxford's, or Wikipedia's) at all. It is a remedy for copyright infrigement , which, again, is a legal ter…

I'm not defending the DMCA. Did I mention it? I pointed out that DM copied other works I saw previously on dribbble. Adding information to the discussion, that spawned more threads. "What exactly is the point you're trying to make?"

The point I am trying to make is that you are not adding information to the discussion. It's obvious upon inspection that a small portion of the graphical assets, and even the color scheme are similar. It is equally obvious that they are not identical. This thread is about the appropriateness of LayerVault abusing the DMCA's takedown provisions in order to stifle an open source project in response to perceived "similarities" that do not satisfy the standard for copyright infringement, the only situation in which it is appropriate (or legal, for that matter) to issue a DMCA takedown notice. The original point I was trying to make (and the point that basically everyone else responding to you is trying to make, that you don't seem to understand) is that this is true regardless of whether or not designmodo is "copying" their "style", "feel", or color palette, and that throwing around a DMCA takedown notice so casually is unacceptable behavior, regardless of how injured they feel.

Re: LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI

#340

Post by alexpenny »

milkshakes wrote: post #339
alexpenny wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not defending the DMCA. Did I mention it? I pointed out that DM copied other works I saw previously on dribbble. Adding information to the discussion, that spawned more threads. "What exactly is the point you're trying to make?"

The point I am trying to make is that you are not adding information to the discussion. It's obvious upon inspection that a small portion of the graphical assets, and even the color scheme are similar. It is equally obvious that they are not identical. This thread is about the appropriateness of LayerVault abusing the DMCA's takedown provisions in order to stifle an open source project in response to perceived "simil…

> It's obvious upon inspection that a small portion of the graphical assets, as well as the overall color scheme are similar.

Thank you for agreeing with my original comment. night!

Post reply on HN