
Flat UI DMCA Takedown - elliotlai
https://github.com/designmodo/Flat-UI
======
kyro
So, both sides have pretty much spoken, and what irks me the most is that the
LayerVault guys haven't provided any concrete evidence to support their
claims; they've posted vague responses and joked about DMCA'ing their friends
on Twitter. There's also the question of why they would even pursue something
like this. A simple Risks/Benefits analysis would've surely led most people
not to issue a DMCA over a few icons they felt were stolen.

It's hard not to lose a little respect fo the LayerVault guys, even if the
icons in question were _direct copies_. I get you're protective of your art,
but this doesn't really make sense from a business standpoint, and their
response has been less than convincing. It's really disappointing.

~~~
DanBC
I could understand a DMCA if the icons were direct copies and if FlatUI had
not responded to any email requests.

Even then it's a good idea to put up a quick and easy comparison sheet.

But for things like "3 cogs" (cogs are different sizes, different colours,
different numbers of teeth, different orientation) it's ridiculous to DMCA it.
3 Cogs is so generic that it's an annoyance to engineers. (Because the cogs
are usually drawn in such a way that they cannot possibly turn).

HN is generally pretty good when people rip off a design. Even people like me
(who have very little idea about design) respect the amount of work and
expertise that goes on. But it's because I have so little clue about design
that people need to explain the similarities. If you're the first people to
curl a newspaper under then tell me that. Show me what people used to do, and
how you innovated that.

~~~
L4mppu
Comparison image for anyone who is interested. <http://imgur.com/ejGIlx0> Left
one is Flat UI and right one is Layer Vault.

~~~
nobleach
Anyone else troubled by the idea of three interlocking cogs? I mean, it's an
icon meaning deadlock, right?

~~~
JungleGymSam
That would make sense if all three cogs were interlocked but they are not. The
top two cogs are not close enough to each other.

------
abcd_f
LayerVault, the same people who brought you DesignerNews.

If that's indeed them who sent the notice, they are just shitting all over
their reputation and alienating a lot of people. Talk about "starting off on
the wrong foot"... and for what? A design that is border-line trivial. It
would seem that their best option for getting the situation under control is
to release their own version of the toolkit. A version that is sufficiently
different from their original background-color, border-radius and icon @font-
face. If not, they are bound to repeat the clone wars of Svbtle.

 _Edit_ | LayerVault actually appears to be a pretty useful product, clearly
with a lot of thought sunk into it. Which makes it twice as unfortunate that
they decided to pursue something like this. Google "LayerVault videos" if
interested.

~~~
supercoder
I lost respect for LayerVault when their software that I paid what I thought
was good money for totally corrupted the PSD of an entire project that had 2
months worth of work put into it.

I thought I had a backup on my laptop, desktop, remote backup from my desktop
and all the revisions on their server. But all revisions were corrupted and it
synced those bad copies to all my machines, including the machine that
performed it's own remote backup (so all those backups were broken).

Their support team acknowledged that it was a problem and that they were
'hoping' to fix in an upcoming version, but offered absolutely no solution to
fix my data except their apologies.

Never going to trust that product ever again if they don't have data integrity
as their number 1 priority.

~~~
kayoone
This is bad but it also looks like you didnt have a proper backup strategy.
Their service looks like a versioning/syncing service but not a backup
service.

~~~
supercoder
Well that's the thing, I actually thought my backup strategy was decent
enough. Multiple versioned copies in multiple places.

My desktop was being backed up nightly to a remote source. Though it was the
laptop (which wasnt being backed up) which I was doing the work on / changes
to. But I saw that layer vault was syncing the changes to the desktop so
figured it was fine.

So it went Laptop -> Layer Vault -> Desktop -> Remote Backup. But of course
everything that passed through Layer Vault got corrupted. And eventually it
'resynced' all that corruption back to the laptop and the file went completely
dead. So there ended up being _no_ good copies of it.

So yeah in hindsight can say it was my fault for not doing nightlys of the
laptop. But at the time I _thought_ my strategy was fine, trusting that while
at worst I'd lose a few versions or something if something terrible happened,
not for it to actively destroy the file.

~~~
eksith
One kind of anything is a single point of failure.

Well hindsight is always 20/20, but your backup strategy still relied on a
single service (that wasn't your own). Backup is one thing no one should
completely rely on a third-party. Whether it's a USB drive, good ol' DVDs or
what have you, anything else "of your own" is crucial at least weekly if not
end-of-day.

The effort going into your backups must match the value you place on your
data.

~~~
tripzilch
no the problem here was not checking the integrity of your backups.

not a "one kind of anything" single pt of failure problem. he expected
LayerVault to not corrupt the PSDs sent through them (and the syncing actions
made it worse), which is not unreasonable. it's the same as trusting Photoshop
to write PSD files to disk that are identical when opened later.

the difference is that Photoshop is more time-tested and well-known, which
changes the odds, but in your argument still would make Photoshop's saving
mechanism a single point of failure as well.

and then what, use more different graphic design tools? :)

in your example, if you burn your backups to a good ol' DVD, don't you check
that the files are actually on there? and have the burning tool check the
integrity? and finally, if you don't check a few of those PSDs to actually
load in Photoshop, who knows that the data your DVD burning tool received was
correct?

~~~
eksith
Oh, quit nitpicking! :P

You're right, backups are meaningless if they're unchecked. No different than
dumping to a tape drive that's never verified and you get weeks of... nothing.

------
pyalot2
Good luck Layervault, you might want to think about this some harder.

Github search found 116 repositories: [https://github.com/search?q=flat-
ui&ref=commandbar](https://github.com/search?q=flat-ui&ref=commandbar)

There are 48 forks alone of this single fork:
<https://github.com/iurevych/Flat-UI/network/members>

The project itself shows 129 forks.

You really prepared to piss off hundreds of people by sending a DMCA takedown
to each and every one? Really? Do you know when to stop digging? Is the hole
deep enough yet? Found some suspicious odorous dark substance? I can tell you,
it's not oil.

------
donpark
I think these are the icons in question from LayerVault, DesignMode, and
similar icons from Noun Project.

<http://imgur.com/IH1osAD>

~~~
DanBC
I'd love to see a "Family Tree" style layout from a GUI Historian, showing the
development of different icons.

"Here's the eMail icon. This version was designed by Susan Kare".

~~~
yuchi
That's a work of [philological][1] investigation, and I'd like to see
something like that too. Could it be good project?

[1]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philology>

------
rplnt
So it seems that you have to provide exactly zero proof and your word (in a
good faith) is enough to take a repository down. There is no way to verify
anything and in order to stay safe they (github in this case) have to take the
content down.

Now imagine I file a takedown notice for every aspiring project posted here on
HN that is hosted on github. They take a pretty good hit from it I'd assume,
to be silenced on the launch. Of course I open myself to litigation with false
takedown request... but what do I care? I'm not a citizen of United States and
I don't really care what laws are there.

So what now? How can this work?

~~~
tripzilch
It means that hosting public data in a US-based cloud means opening up
yourself to a single point of failure!

I'm not entirely sure whether you can submit a DMCA takedown request if you're
not a citizen of the USA. For once, you need to provide US-based contact info.

However, I am not sure if the service provider needs to check whether this
contact info is correct before takedown.

So it seems that any public-facing data on any US-based server can be made to
disappear for at least 10-14 days. But just because a country has crappy laws
doesn't mean you should use those laws against them! ;)

~~~
r00fus
> I'm not entirely sure whether you can submit a DMCA takedown request if
> you're not a citizen of the USA. For once, you need to provide US-based
> contact info.

So you can't just have an agent do the request on your behalf?

------
kombine
Just read the DCMA notice. Does it really mean anyone can write this sort of
message, without any details or proof and you have to oblige to it?

~~~
pyre
The basic idea is that for a provider (Github, Google, etc), to keep their
Safe Harbour protections, they have to act like a 'dumb pipe' and just obey
these notices. Just like how the phone companies trying to keep their Common
Carrier status[1].

Even without the DMCA, if the service provider interjects itself into the
dispute they risk legal action against themselves. For example, they could
evaluate the claims wrong, and get sued to allowing actually infringing
material to stay up.

It goes like this:

1\. DMCA is filed by a person/entity with the service-provider.

2\. Service-provider takes down offending content.

3\. The person/entity that submitted the offending content now has the option
to file a counter-notice with their service provider claiming that they
feel/know there is no infringement. If they do file a counter-notice, then we
continue on. If they don't file a counter-notice, then the story ends here.

4\. The service-provider notifies the person/entity that filed the DMCA notice
that a counter-notice was filed. The service-provider can now restore the
content, but there is some weird stipulation that they need to wait something
like 10 ~ 14 days before doing so.

5\. The person/entity that filed the original notice now has to take legal
action against the person/entity that they feel has infringed their copyrights
if they want anything more to happen.

The party that files the DMCA notice stipulates that they believe that their
work has been infringed under penalty of perjury.

[1] For a long time, people on the Internet believed that 'Common Carrier'
provisions applied to ISPs, but it really only applies to phone companies. The
Safe Harbour provisions of the DMCA are meant to give something similar for
ISPs, though there are different rules.

~~~
AliAdams
Thanks for the full explanation. So are there no repercussions on the filing
party unless the defending party seeks legal action? If the system is blind
and you have a somewhat decent legal team you could surely hamstring your
competition particularly on more subjective cases like this. 15 days can be a
big hit (eg taking a site off google around Christmas)

~~~
darkarmani
Can you revoke a DMCA request you issue? This would be the reasonable way to
handle mistakes. If the defending party, clears up all misunderstanding and
proves to the other party that they made a mistake before 15 days is up, they
should have to pull the DMCA request or suffer a larger burden of proof that
they were acting in good faith.

~~~
pyre
Information obtained _after_ the DMCA takedown request was issued shouldn't
affect whether or not the request was made in good faith ex post facto.
Currently there are no penalties (specified in the DMCA) for not withdrawing
the request once it's become clear that it's bogus. There may be other ways
under the law to get punished for a lack of action though. E.g. there may be
case-law that states you can be penalized for a good faith action if you don't
make motions to correct the mistake once you realize it.

~~~
darkarmani
Yeah, I understand how it is currently. I was saying it should (in a perfect
world) be a much harder battle to prove you were acting in good faith if you
are provided clear evidence that your request is completely wrong and you fail
to redress the claim. The time period for a take down can cause a lot of harm
to sites in exactly the same way that leaving up infringing stuff can.

------
overshard
This was a big article already not even two days ago on HN:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5331766>

Why is this being upvoted a 2nd time in the same week to the top of the
homepage...

~~~
usaphp
because they actually took it down.

~~~
overshard
It was actually down at the time of that post too. I know because I was using
Flat UI in a new project and had to ditch their vector illustrations which
were the items in question from this DMCA.

~~~
minimaxir
They took it down, but you used to get a 404 when you visited the repo. This
is the first time that it explicitly says that a DMCA request was executed.

~~~
mynameisvlad
No, I definitely had the DMCA notice when I tried it two days ago.

I remember because I was trying to get it not having heard of the takedown,
and it wasn't working, and, after getting to the page, saw the notice.

------
LogicX
For those upset with LayerVault's behavior, but are intrigued by their product
offering, I just found <http://pixelapse.com> which appears to be the closest
competitor: [http://www.quora.com/Design/How-do-LayerVault-and-
Pixelapse-...](http://www.quora.com/Design/How-do-LayerVault-and-Pixelapse-
compare)

~~~
mnicole
Those that have used both are bigger fans of Pixelapse because it doesn't
automatically save a "version" every time you save the file in Photoshop.
Their payment tiers are also much more consumer-friendly:
<https://www.pixelapse.com/pricing> vs. <https://layervault.com/pricing>

------
Udo
So I think the Noun Project should just send a takedown notice to LayerVault.
Since the perjury clause only pertains to contact info and whether they can
represent the project itself, that would have the same consequences for
"accidentally" getting the actual allegation wrong (=none), right?

~~~
mnutt
No, in a DMCA notice you state under penalty of perjury that you are the
rights holder for the content you want removed, not your own content.

~~~
Udo
Sure, but if LV can argue it owns the rights to a similar-looking "ripoff",
then another icon project can claim likewise in respect to them. Got a
newspaper icon, or a stylized human emoting something? That's enough,
apparently.

~~~
mnutt
I'm not a lawyer, but it seems that the consensus here is that LV _isn't_
allowed to assert that they own the rights, and therefore may be perjuring
themselves.

------
gfosco
Takedown notice commit with comments:
[https://github.com/github/dmca/commit/735e17614cca63102b8414...](https://github.com/github/dmca/commit/735e17614cca63102b8414ed2846c3effbfe9535)

Counter notice commit with comments:
[https://github.com/github/dmca/commit/6a33a213e04e7fc5e74ce3...](https://github.com/github/dmca/commit/6a33a213e04e7fc5e74ce3cab80fee778f641acc)

------
loudin
Did LayerVault try to contact Flat UI to discuss their grievances before
sending a DMCA Takedown? If so, what was the result of that conversation. If
not, why didn't LayerVault pursue that path before posting this to Github?

We in tech need to be good to each other because other corporate interests and
patent trolls won't be. We should always give each other the benefit of the
doubt and try to resolve issues without menacing legal language and the threat
of lawyers. We need to show we can thrive without this garbage. Otherwise, it
will only embolden our enemies and cause this type of confrontation to happen
more frequently in the future - to everyone's detriment.

~~~
notatoad
Layervault emailed the flat UI creator to ask him to take it down, flat UI
refused because they didn't believe their work was infringing. Layervault kept
pestering the guy, and eventually he gave up and removed a couple of the
icons. And then layervault took this cooperation to be an admission of guilt
and sent a DMCA takedown notice.

~~~
mratzloff
And this is the problem with cooperation. There is no "we in tech" between
companies; it's a liability.

------
xcasex
This all relates to trade dress, not copyright per se. there's also the
question of originality i.e: Two men are wearing suits. Both suits originate
in previous suits. The similarities that they therefore share would be those
attributes of the suit that is not encompassed by previous works. So
therefore, even though the two suits the two men may be wearing appear
virtually identical, they are indeed not and do not share any substantial
similarities to one another.

it's trés bothersome when designers behave like this when they're themselves
just un/consciously influenced by previous artmovements and designers (florian
freundt(2003), matias duarte spring to mind).

------
ThomPete
There is an unfortunate tendency in the creative field (design, music etc) to
think of ones ideas as unique and that others are stealing them.

I never understood why people don't just embrace the idea of imitation being
the biggest form of flattery.

So you are doing something right, great continue with that.

LayerVault lost me as a customer today.

------
askimto
Something can be a "rip off" and not infringe.

~~~
zizee
My feeling is that you should be able to imitate something without infringing
on copyright, but not everyone agrees:

[http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/25/Imitated_Image_Copyr...](http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/25/Imitated_Image_Copyright_Case)

~~~
xcasex
But then the question arises, is the person consciously aware of his
influences or is he/she just building upon cultural memory? I mean were the DM
designers at or about the moment where they released or designed their
products had conscious exposure or borrowed either consciously or
unconsciously using any of the imagery of LV. There's a lot of unknown
unknowns in this whole mess, well to be fair in all affairs of this sort,
you'd have to know what the artist and designers were actually thinking when
they were going through their creative process, which you nor I cannot do. For
all we know, some of these items could be their inspiration. We also don't
know the reading habits or exposure to culture that they may or may not have
had as young adults, or even as adults where they may have, for example,
forgotten specific elements of exposure, and that's sort of one part.

the other part deals strictly with derivatives (creative meaning, not legal)
What I mean is that strictly speaking, the new art movement influenced the
"flat ui" movement, a folded newspaper is clearly an influence for the nuon
project, dribbble iconry, DM flat ui representation and the LV icon. In much
the same way a set of gears are derivative of a set of.. gears, which has been
represented in too many ways in art that it's lost the entire concept of
originality.

and Originality, due to Barthe's work on the Death of authorship, is quite
moot at this point.

------
jared314
I have never seen the inside of LayerVault. The demo page only has vague
outlines of similar controls. Does anyone have screenshots of LayerVault in
action?

~~~
nwh
All I could find.

<http://i.imgur.com/yFHlGVH.png>

<http://i.imgur.com/VX1h4Xj.png>

<http://i.imgur.com/oyAYDM8.png>

<http://i.imgur.com/ZUlf0hF.png>

<http://i.imgur.com/QMSTZ8k.png>

Given that they don't show it off on their demo page, it's either incomplete
or clunky.

~~~
enra
Those are pretty old pictures, and for sure it's not clunky. You can try out
the 30-day trial for free. Nowadays it looks like this:
<http://cl.ly/image/1k230I2l421S>

~~~
nwh
Free as in give us your credit card details and cancel before we change you.
Not happening.

------
cientifico
Another reason to not do business with an American company. DMCA, patent
trolls... I will be really afraid if someday I launch a service in the UUSS.

------
gklitt
Funny that the mods haven't fixed the typo in this title in the 4 hours since
it was posted, they must be too busy messing up other titles by removing
useful context and deleting swear words...

------
newishuser
If you want to speak up, don't hesitate to contact LayerVault's support (
support@layervault.com ) and let them know, respectfully, how you feel. You
can also tweet your opinions @layervault.

I stress respectfully. Try to be well spoken and sincere.

~~~
xcasex
I actually did. I was told by @Allan -- the founder of LV -- that I was
"trolling", "writing inflammatory blog posts", that my "entire base of
argument was based on the wrong facts". All in all, a very obtuse strawman
argument, so being well spoken, sincere in many ways, will only lead to that
sort of reaction from LV.

~~~
omni
I'm not calling you a liar, but it's helpful in these situations if you can
link to something that supports your claims.

~~~
xcasex
omni, here you go: <http://twitter.com/almightycasey>

------
mrspeaker
grumble... I didn't grab it the other day for a prototype I am going to make
because "it's on github when I need it" ;)

------
akakey
question is, whom do I send a DMCA notice about a person who is slightly
younger but looks like me, not even exactly like but, uh, like me.

~~~
mproud
You can try a lawsuit for anything, about anything. It comes down to how
likely it will be held up in a court of law, and generally, it helps if a
precedent already exists.

As unlikely as it may sound, there have been lawsuits somewhat like what you
describe. Perhaps most notorious is a tattoo artist claiming IP on Mike
Tyson’s face tat visibly shown on Ed Helm’s character’s face, being used
without permission. The artist sued Warner Bros. (I believe) for damages and
asking to be taken down. IIRC the judge was very close to issuing an
injunction against /The Hangover 2/. Not sure what ended up happening;
probably settled out of court.

------
Finster
Quick! Someone patent using the three bars as a link to a dropdown menu. Then,
you can DMCA takedown ALL THE UI KITS!

------
domrdy
Oh man, I was looking forward to use this in my upcoming weekend project.

------
Nyarlah
I hope that won't set a precedent on Github and we won't start seeing abusive
and/or automated dmca's on repositories all around because "similar images
were matched", youtube-style.

------
kbar13
woah look at what happens when you try to fork it.

~~~
onto
What happens?

~~~
micheljansen
This happens:

<http://cl.ly/image/2X2c1T1X043a>

I was secretly hoping that it would act recursively when clicking the second
"fork" button, creating a "fork bomb" of sorts, but no cigar :P

------
phryk
"Good faith belief" sounds totally tangible. m(

------
JungleGymSam
Won't someone correct the title?

------
dakimov
What was the subject of the copyright claims? Flatness?

------
roevhat
Apparently...

