For the lazy, here's a summary of the claims that LV/DN is making:<p>Some icons appear to be heavily inspired by LV.<p>Here are three icons (circled) from Flat-UI: <a href="http://i.imgur.com/xDDULcG.png" rel="nofollow">http://i.imgur.com/xDDULcG.png</a><p>You can see that the gears and news icons do bear some similarity to LV's versions: <a href="http://dribbble.com/shots/800428-LayerVault-icon-set-for-delivery" rel="nofollow">http://dribbble.com/shots/800428-LayerVault-icon-set-for-del...</a> and <a href="http://imgur.com/rli5IVU" rel="nofollow">http://imgur.com/rli5IVU</a> (the latter via <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5332741" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5332741</a>)<p>In addition, LV claims that Flat-UI ripped off a number of other icons from dribble.com, such as this clock and map (Flat-UI above, originals below): <a href="http://cl.ly/image/3Q181w0b1u2K" rel="nofollow">http://cl.ly/image/3Q181w0b1u2K</a> (original dribble links: <a href="http://dribbble.com/shots/695458-Nasa-Playbook-Icons" rel="nofollow">http://dribbble.com/shots/695458-Nasa-Playbook-Icons</a> and <a href="http://dribbble.com/shots/877061-Map-2013" rel="nofollow">http://dribbble.com/shots/877061-Map-2013</a>).<p>Finally, the color schemes have been claimed to be identical: <a href="http://pixxel.co/feed/layervault-issues-dmca-takedown" rel="nofollow">http://pixxel.co/feed/layervault-issues-dmca-takedown</a><p>LV appears to be confused as to what constitutes copyright infringement. None of these icons are actually copies of the original, and even if they were LV would not have a right to issue a DMCA takedown for the ones they didn't own.<p>This seems to be a massive PR blunder for the LV guys. They could have put up a blog post enumerating how many of their (and others') designs were <i>ripped off</i> (which is not the same thing as copyright infringement) and probably garnered some internet sympathy. Now, by misusing the much-hated DMCA takedown notice they've positioned themselves in the same camp with all the DMCA bullies we have grown to loathe.
And here's a reply from Allan:
<a href="https://news.layervault.com/stories/1992-layervault-whats-up-with-the-dmca" rel="nofollow">https://news.layervault.com/stories/1992-layervault-whats-up...</a><p>Looks like the pitchforks are out over on HN.<p>It was pretty straightforward. Our reaction was "Cool, a flat UI theme" to "Wait, this looks familiar" to "Wait, are those our illustrations?".<p>I contacted the designmodo people over email, because that's the right way to handle this. The owner was being stubborn at first and refused to admit wrongdoing. At that point, I submitted the DMCA request. Eventually, he removed the most blatant icons which (in my eyes) is an admission of guilt.<p>They even managed to kinda lift the old DN icon :) <a href="http://imgur.com/3zoKuvH" rel="nofollow">http://imgur.com/3zoKuvH</a><p>If you have some intimiate knowledge of LayerVault's UI (which their designer apparently does), the similarities are a bit more than striking. That's not a huge issue until you release everything together - the icons, the colors, the UI elements, whatever.<p>We give a lot of our stuff away for free. We put a lot of our projects on cosmos.layervault.com, we write about interesting concepts we've come up with and include the code on our blog, whatever. This isn't about thinking we own "Flat Design" or being mad that there's some other design out there with a similar aesthetic.
The founder of LayerVault is claiming it was specific illustrations which were stolen<p><a href="https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309346292902014976" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309346292902014976</a>
<a href="https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309350351054716929" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309350351054716929</a>
I have the old pre-dmca Flat UI gitgub page from yesterday open in another window, and designmodo has apparently made a few changes since then. Just based on that, I'm going to guess that the problem was stemming from these.<p><a href="http://i.imgur.com/xDDULcG.png" rel="nofollow">http://i.imgur.com/xDDULcG.png</a>
Complete Side by Side Comparison<p>TLDR:<p>Noun Project vs Layer Vault vs Flat UI<p><a href="http://imgur.com/IH1osAD" rel="nofollow">http://imgur.com/IH1osAD</a><p>If anyone notice other similar icons, I can update image with side by side comparison.<p>Thanks to fellow HNers for the links to the images. I just stuck it all together side by side.<p>Edit: Updated with more samples.
Filing a counter notification is extremely straightforward, and moves this to a court dispute, which will almost undoubtedly never happen.<p>You can use Chilling Effects Counter-Notification generator to automate the process:<p><a href="http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca/counter512.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca/counter512.pdf</a><p>For those who are unfamiliar with DMCA notices, in short:<p>1. Content Provider Receives DMCA<p>2. Content Provider must act 'expeditiously' to remove content which is claimed to be infringing<p>3. Individual has an opportunity to submit a counter notification to their content provider, in which case the content can be reinstated after 10 business days regardless of the other parties claims. (Unless an injunction is obtained.)<p>4. Any further action is only by legal means (court injunction)<p>Disclaimer: IANAL (yet)
Why don't we, as a community, collectively agree to boycott copyright trolls? (and teach them a lesson in the process)<p>esp. when the target audience consists of developers/designers<p>EDIT: I tried to cross-post this on Designer News, but it turns out they're invite-only. Can someone do me the honour?
Am I understanding this right; that LayerVault is trying to claim that they are the sole owners of the flat UI trend? I'm sorry Allan, I've been a fan of yours since before LayerVault was even launched, but this is really low. And if I'm remembering correctly, this isn't the first time you guys have harassed someone about using "your" aesthetic.
Can someone please summarize for those of us not plugged in to the web UI framework (or whatever this is) community? I'm seeing entities like "LayerVault" and "Flat UI" and products (?) named "trend" that I've never heard of.<p>Is this an abuse of process I should actually care about or is it just a "who did what?" spit between estranged developers?
What I personally don't understand is that if DesignModo did actually copy assets from LayerVault, why doesn't LV name said assets and possibly include screenshots or whatever in the DMCA claim? Or make a post about it. Or really, <i>anything</i> that would include the specific information so that people wouldn't be left guessing. As evident by the reactions, not being specific here only serves to make LV's claims seem unsubstantial. I'm personally rather doubtful about their validity for the same reason as well.<p>Also, I think it's pretty ridiculous that a DMCA takedown can even be "valid" without specifying <i>what</i> exactly was infringed - <i>"I am the exclusive rights holder for the artwork contained within Flat UI, Free Web User Interface Kit"</i> isn't exactly saying much.
Without some extraordinary explanation by Layer Vault detailing an actual theft of files or copying of their actual work, it sounds like Layer Vault just did a <i>major</i> scumbag move that harms designers everywhere.<p>And that's a shame because I like Layer Vault <i>a lot</i>.
Maybe Hacker News should send you a take down notice for copying HN with "Designer News" aka DN?<p><a href="https://news.layervault.com/stories" rel="nofollow">https://news.layervault.com/stories</a>
You can't copyright a color pallet.
You can't copyright an icon concept.<p>Sending DMCA take-downs without full intent to prosecute and full conviction that your copyrights have been violated is not only illegal but shameful.
For being a design oriented company, LayerVault can't choose type colors worth shit. I can barely read any of the body text on nearly every page of their site.<p>They need to read up on W3's proposed contrast minimums: <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/#visual-audio-contrast-contrast" rel="nofollow">http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/#visual-audio-contrast-contrast</a>
What's kind of ridiculous is that LayerVault took a lot of inspiration (I repeat, A LOT) from Hacker News with regards to the design of their discussion site. From the URL, the minimalism, and the link design. Heck, even the name is copied -- Designer News? Really?<p>I guess pg should send a DMCA takedown notice to them, then.
I thought "look and feel" lawsuits over UI were settled long ago?<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Software#.22Look_and_feel.22_lawsuits" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Software#.22Look_and_feel...</a>
Congratulations to LayerVault on their biggest day of traffic ever. Whether this brew-ha-ha was intentional or not, a lot more people are now aware of them than before today.<p>I like browsing their Designer News links on a daily basis, but I would think twice about signing up for a service run by people with questionable character and morals, which is the feeling I am coming away with after reading through this thread.<p>This whole thing could have been handled a lot better and with far more professionalism.
I can't help but think this sort of thing is going to happen more and more as we move towards a flat/minimalist UI.<p>I've read comments (not on HN) from people who have endorsed the DMCA takedown because of their personal ethics and morals rather than knowledge of the law. Particularly one who claimed that the similar colour palettes between LV and Flat UI justified the takedown - even though colour palettes themselves are currently not copyrightable subject matter. To win on those grounds you'd need a genius (and crazy) lawyer and a judge who is either asleep at the wheel or bribed. Then you'd lose on appeal anyway.<p>Colours can be only trademarked. Using that colour is not a copyright violation. Hence no DMCA.<p>It makes me sad that as we all move towards minimalist design startup founders will need to know IP law better than a few years ago. Some of this is due to trolling and some because of a mislead or otherwise naive understanding of the law like I mentioned above. It's just adding pressure on founders that we don't really need and more work for lawyers.<p>A lot of us are doing whatever we're doing for the first time and that makes us (potentially) easy targets. A better knowledge of the law in this scenario might have prevented everything from blowing up like it has. But Flat UI and Layervault wouldn't have had as much energy put into the product and so everyone suffers.<p>Then again I'm in law school right now so at least I know there's a job in all of this if i ever need it :-/<p>I guess I just wish we could stop bickering about stuff like this and get on with building cool stuff.
I don't care for the whole "flatUI" trend, but I REALLY can't stand this kind of blatant abuse of the DMCA (which itself can be argued to be an abuse of common sense).
Am I the only one here who sees nothing wrong with copying icons? Layer Vault doesn't own the things they freely display for others to imitate.<p>I'm repulsed at the idea of "owning" a visual depiction of a fucking newspaper.<p>And yes, I've worked for years of my life as a designer. I know what if feels like to have people copy you.
The reality is that DesignModo is not new to this.<p>I have been waiting for this to happen for a while. Their "Bricks UI" is an extremely blatant copy of Google Ventures' web site, and it's weird nothing happened there.<p><a href="http://www.googleventures.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.googleventures.com/</a>
<a href="http://designmodo.com/the-bricks-addons/" rel="nofollow">http://designmodo.com/the-bricks-addons/</a><p>I'm not on either side, but it's just painful to watch the reactions on HN. It seems like a lot of the commenters were just closed down somewhere waiting for the right occasion to blame some copyright enforcer.
Always With Honor should go after LayerVault.
Saul Bass should go after Always With Honor.
Picasso should go after Saul Bass.<p>Any designer that doesn't understand that design is an iterative process, shouldn't be a designer anymore.
I'm not a massive fan of the most of the responses in this thread.<p>Any designer would look at Flat UI and immediately realize that they drew inspiration from LayerVault. The similarities aren't minor, in either style, tone, or techniques.<p>The three icons DesignModo removed were the most obvious offenders. And by obvious, I mean, "Yeah, you completely ripped those".<p>So DesignModo has absolutely no right, in any sense, to be indignant. They produced unoriginal, lazy, copied work, and got called out on it.<p>Within this thread, I see lots of idiotic bits such as "LayerVault doesn't own hex codes!", "You can't own a style!", etc etc. These type of comments miss the forest for the trees.<p>Individually, no, LayerVault has no right to claim ownership of any specific color. But Flat UI's rip is the combination of a rip of all things together, not one thing in specific. Change the color scheme of the illustrations and you'd have less of a case. Change the shadow technique, or the general aesthetic of the icons.<p>It's the COMBINATION of all of these factors which makes this a "rip".<p>Now, what DesignModo did may not be illegal, but why is anyone rushing to defend them? In what terrible universe is being an insipid, unoriginal copier something any community champions?<p>And why would anyone walk away with a negative opinion of LayerVault? Really? You don't think they should be slightly irked that DesignModo ripped off their distinctive style, and is _charging_ people for the chance to use it?<p>It baffles the mind.
I think this serves as a great testimony to just how homogenous / under-considered the "flat" aesthetic has become. For crying out loud, flatUI is a kit for replicating this appearance! I love the flat look, but as soon as kits for replicating a look start to grow in popularity, it's time to move on.
The only thing that is not completely generic imo is the color scheme FlatUI picked, which is similar to the scheme on LayerVault. But it's not exactly the same (I checked, everything is quite close though). Don't think something like that warrants an action like this at all.
Seems like their complaining about the news icon. Here's the DN icon and the flat-ui icon side by side: <a href="https://acr-skitch.s3.amazonaws.com/news.png-20130306-130455.png" rel="nofollow">https://acr-skitch.s3.amazonaws.com/news.png-20130306-130455...</a>
When the Flat UI was released, I was waiting for Layervaults response. In their defence, the style, colors, some of the icons are very close to Layervaults, so I can understand their frustration. I have no doubt that designmodo had more than "inspiration" from Layervault.<p>Probably they didn't break copyright, but basically they copied the style and made it a commodity (this is like the Svbtle thing all over again). Flat design is a trend, but I haven't seen similar site, with similar colors and style as Layervault. When you ripoff something almost 1:1 in design, necessarily it isn't illegal but it isn't honorable either. As a designer, you shouldn't do that to other designers.
The designmodo logo is quite debian-esque. Maybe too close to debian's i'd think.<p>EDIT: <a href="https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/7d9027189b18855f5f2ddeb7db62311c.jpg" rel="nofollow">https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/7d9027189b18855f5f2ddeb7d...</a>
If these layervault dickholes really believed so strongly in this, they'd issue a DMCA against designmodo's webhost.<p>But then designmodo would absolutely be forced to defend itself and layervault would be liable in court.<p>DMCA is a bunch of bullshit.
Does anyone have a active subscription to Layervault?<p>Here's the Flat UI designs:
<a href="http://designmodo.github.com/Flat-UI/" rel="nofollow">http://designmodo.github.com/Flat-UI/</a><p>LV is saying that illustrations/artwork was the reason for the notice so if anyone have artwork on the dashboard they can compare that'd be great (cause I can't find any copied artwork from their main site).<p>Layervault
<a href="https://layervault.com/" rel="nofollow">https://layervault.com/</a><p>The issue is artwork/illustration.
Really glad I downloaded Flat UI yesterday before this crap started 'coz I'm gonna be using it for a project this weekend.<p>Fortunately I only wanted the CSS. If an illustration was stolen (which seems unlikely, or at least it wasn't done with designmodo's knowledge), that won't affect me since I'm not using any of them.
This is why we can't have nice things.<p>Even Apple didn't even go after others when rounded corners, glassy/glossy, gradient buttons was the trend. (Yes, Apple didn't invent those, just as LV didn't invent flat UI or the art work - which btw, is just a flat color. Glad Pantone isn't going around with LV's mentality.)<p>Just speechless.
The DMCA counter-notice has been submitted: <a href="https://github.com/github/dmca/commit/6a33a213e04e7fc5e74ce3cab80fee778f641acc" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/github/dmca/commit/6a33a213e04e7fc5e74ce3...</a>
Does anyone notice a striking similarity between the "Debian swirl" and the e in Designmodo?<p>It's obviously not a copy of it, but rather an "inspired version" of it. With that being said, it's definitely possible that designmodo didn't copy layervault, but rather was "inspired" by them. Not sure how that would stand up legally, but I would say that if I were designer, it would be "ethically annoying".
Someone please lend LayerVault some contrast.<p><a href="http://i.imgur.com/jfSuxcK.png" rel="nofollow">http://i.imgur.com/jfSuxcK.png</a><p><a href="http://i.imgur.com/cMO4lxA.png" rel="nofollow">http://i.imgur.com/cMO4lxA.png</a><p><a href="http://i.imgur.com/JnaZdN7.png" rel="nofollow">http://i.imgur.com/JnaZdN7.png</a><p>I cannot believe a "top notch" design house can get this so wrong.<p>Edit: Designer News seems to suffer from the same affliction.<p><a href="https://news.layervault.com/" rel="nofollow">https://news.layervault.com/</a><p>A lot of sites that are HN these days seem to lack contrast, what's up with that?
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?<p>It's sort of like the logic of GPL.