
LayerVault Sends DMCA Takedown Letter re Flat-UI - bencevans
https://github.com/github/dmca/commit/735e17614cca63102b8414ed2846c3effbfe9535#commitcomment-2751021
======
ender7
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...](http://dribbble.com/shots/800428-LayerVault-icon-set-for-delivery) and
<http://imgur.com/rli5IVU> (the latter via
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5332741>)

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):
<http://cl.ly/image/3Q181w0b1u2K> (original dribble links:
<http://dribbble.com/shots/695458-Nasa-Playbook-Icons> and
<http://dribbble.com/shots/877061-Map-2013>).

Finally, the color schemes have been claimed to be identical:
<http://pixxel.co/feed/layervault-issues-dmca-takedown>

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.

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 _ripped
off_ (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.

~~~
onemorepassword
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, let alone going nuclear with a DMCA.

LayerVault _are_ copyright trolls and bullies.

~~~
lucisferre
Give me a break. One single misguided DMCA notice does not make one a
copyright _troll_.

~~~
Karunamon
One who trolls with copyright is a copyright troll. This is not a difficult
concept.

~~~
usea
Making a mistake is not the same thing as trolling. Trolling is being
willfully wrong, usually to gain some benefit (eliciting a pleasurable
response, financial gain).

Showing that they were incorrect does not show they are a troll.

~~~
thomasmeeks
If LayerVault made a mistake and apologized, sure. But one look at their
twitter page & their response on designer news implies no apology is
forthcoming. So, they are copyright trolls and bullies. They are not only
running against the spirit of the law, but also the letter of it.

------
mrmaddog
And here's a reply from Allan:
[https://news.layervault.com/stories/1992-layervault-whats-
up...](https://news.layervault.com/stories/1992-layervault-whats-up-with-the-
dmca)

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 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.

They even managed to kinda lift the old DN icon :) <http://imgur.com/3zoKuvH>

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.

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.

~~~
jgj
A really good way to coerce the pitchforks back into their sheds is to provide
proof, especially when your DMCA is vague and posted on a ridiculously public
platform.

Allan has done neither, and still hasn't done so in his tweets or this post
over on his bubbly walled garden. A few simple side-by-side screenshots would
have sufficed and put the court of public opinion squarely on his side. He may
be completely in the right but his approach left him open to the "pitchforks"
he's so dismissively bemoaning.

~~~
justjimmy
Here's the side by side comparison

Noun Project vs Layer Vault vs Flat UI

<http://imgur.com/IH1osAD>

If anyone notice other similar icons, I can update image with side by side
comparison.

*Thanks to fellow HNers for the links to the images. I just stuck it all together side by side.

Edit: Updated with more samples.

~~~
Legion
Wow, that is considerably less egregious than I had imagined it would be.

From my initial reading, it sounded like images were outright copied, or
copied and slightly altered. That is hardly the case in these examples.

If there aren't any stronger examples than these, then LayerVault wouldn't
seem to have much of a basis for all this.

------
jgj
The founder of LayerVault is claiming it was specific illustrations which were
stolen

<https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309346292902014976>
<https://twitter.com/Allan/status/309350351054716929>

~~~
dzlobin
This needs to be the top comment here, rather than people insinuating that LV
called for a DMCA takedown because 'they look alike'

~~~
tptacek
Bet on HN embarrassing itself every time on stories like this.

~~~
nicholassmith
HN posters being reactionary to hot topics like DMCA when all the facts aren't
out? Say it ain't so.

~~~
andybak
Except I've read most of the comments and on the whole they seem a) correct
(to my understanding of the DMCA) and b) reasonable and well thought out.

~~~
nicholassmith
The initial ones were very reactionary about boycotting Layer Vault and so on.
The DMCA is super wishy washy, and I can't say whether this is a valid use or
not because IANAL.

------
HeyImAlex
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.

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

~~~
ajanuary
I can find icons that kinda look a bit like those that were removed
(<http://dribbble.com/shots/875799-Designer-News>,
[http://dribbble.com/shots/800428-LayerVault-icon-set-for-
del...](http://dribbble.com/shots/800428-LayerVault-icon-set-for-delivery))
but nothing that's a direct copy.

~~~
dubcanada
They look sort of the same? Three gears in a circle. A guy with a chat bubble
in a kinda same style?

You can't issue a DCMA based on sort of look a likes. Or everyone would be
DCMAing everyone else.

So the entire DCMA is invalid.

------
justjimmy
Complete Side by Side Comparison

TLDR:

Noun Project vs Layer Vault vs Flat UI

<http://imgur.com/IH1osAD>

If anyone notice other similar icons, I can update image with side by side
comparison.

Thanks to fellow HNers for the links to the images. I just stuck it all
together side by side.

Edit: Updated with more samples.

~~~
vicbrooker
There's arguably the talking heads as well:

[http://dribbble.com/shots/800428-LayerVault-icon-set-for-
del...](http://dribbble.com/shots/800428-LayerVault-icon-set-for-delivery)

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

~~~
integraton
That talking head / speech bubble concept is generic:

[https://www.google.com/search?q=%22talking+head%22+bubble...](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22talking+head%22+bubble&hl=en&safe=off&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=Wpg3UciSMYWRrAGR8YCQDw&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAQ&biw=1361&bih=866)

The Noun Project also has a profile speech version, though with curved lines
instead of the bubble: <http://thenounproject.com/noun/speech/#icon-No1202>

Flat UI's version might have been partially inspired by LayerVault, but it's
far from identical. In fact, the Flat UI head is very similar to the Noun
Project's head, similar to how the LayerVault's newspaper is similar to the
Noun Project's.

~~~
vicbrooker
I know that its a bit of a stretch but it wouldn't have surprised me if the
head/bubble icon came up during the email conversation that preceded the DMCA
being filed though.

Doesn't mean I agree with it, but if you're going to have everything that
potentially infringes LV's work you might as well put the stupid ones too.
Plus it's now missing which makes it a bit suspicious (though the replacement
is far better IMO which would explain the head's absence too)

------
Pyramids
Filing a counter notification is extremely straightforward, and moves this to
a court dispute, which will almost undoubtedly never happen.

You can use Chilling Effects Counter-Notification generator to automate the
process:

<http://www.chillingeffects.org/dmca/counter512.pdf>

For those who are unfamiliar with DMCA notices, in short:

1\. Content Provider Receives DMCA

2\. Content Provider must act 'expeditiously' to remove content which is
claimed to be infringing

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.)

4\. Any further action is only by legal means (court injunction)

Disclaimer: IANAL (yet)

~~~
rustc
Curious: What happens if the individual in question is NOT in the US? Can this
still be done?

~~~
Pyramids
EDIT: After rereading your question, I'm assuming you're referring to a
situation similar to my third example scenario, that might best address it.

Generally:

\- If the content provider is outside of the United States, DMCA is not valid
whatsoever. However, some organizations, especially in English speaking
countries, will honor it simply as a notice of infringement.

\- If the individual sending the complaint is outside the United States, but
the content provider is within the US, usually the content provider will
cooperate anyway to protect themselves from legal obligation under Safe Harbor
provisions.

\- If the end user receiving the complaint is outside the United States and
the content provider is within the US then the content provider should still
honor the counter notice and would be covered by Safe Harbor provisions. I'm
not sure on the specifics of this, however you must at minimum consent to the
jurisdiction of US Federal Law for any further actions.

For the most part, the content provider / hosting company will do what is in
their best interest to legally safeguard themselves, with little regard for
end user rights. Generally speaking, the larger the company the moreso this
applies.

Github seems like a reasonable organization, and if you submit a counter
notification in valid format they should act accordingly.

Also, I see the Chilling Effects URL is getting hammered, here's a static
version which you can modify: <http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Terrorism/form-
letter.html>

While unrelated to this issue specifically, something which is interesting to
note is that in a several year old paper from Vanderbilt University, they
specifically mention a provision dealing with enforcing the DMCA on foreign
websites. While this provision has never been used to my knowledge it does
exist and is quite scary considering the implications:

While direct action against a foreign site is not possible in U.S. courts, the
Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) allows courts to order the blocking
of infringing sites. Section 512(j)(1)(B)(ii) (the “Foreign Site Provision”)
permits an order to restrain an Internet service provider (“ISP”) from
providing access to a “specific, identified, online location outside the
United States.” Therefore this provision, with some limitations, may be used
to block U.S. access to infringing foreign sites.

------
aviraldg
Why don't we, as a community, collectively agree to boycott copyright trolls?
(and teach them a lesson in the process)

esp. when the target audience consists of developers/designers

EDIT: I tried to cross-post this on Designer News, but it turns out they're
invite-only. Can someone do me the honour?

~~~
mintplant
Why don't we, as a community, put away the pitchforks until hearing from both
sides?

Looking at the top comment in the thread
(<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5332398>), it seems that DesignModo
lifted some of their illustrations straight from the LayerVault site.

~~~
aviraldg
He only mentions that it looks similar - which isn't enough to file a DMCA
takedown. When does it become problematic? When there's an identical icon in
both sets, which I haven't been able to find so far.

------
mnicole
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.

~~~
Geee
It's not about the flat UI trend. If you look at Layervault, their design is
really unique and top notch. Flat UI-framework is _heavily_ inspired by
Layervault's design. There's no doubt about it. Same roundings, paddings,
pastel color scheme, etc. They look visually extremely similar.

LayerVault is obviously pissed that a design similar to their unique design
will be used by amateur Bootstrappers all over the web.

~~~
justjimmy
I think we're all upset more about the attitude and approach of how LV went
about this.

You can't patent Colors / Helvetica Neue / Rounded Corner Squares. It just
reeks of tactics similar to patent trolls.

I think a while back there was blog theme used that was similar to Svbtle, but
there was no take down notice or such nonsense. It generated a decent
discussion and conversations about something that's too close in style.

Look at @layervault on Twitter, they are just getting destroyed right now.
Even by designers, their main target audience.

If they went along the lines like 'Hey, this is pretty similar to our design.
We think it's cool we inspired you but can you deviate it from us a bit more
or re-name the project to like Layervault Bootstrap?' I mean why not - have
your name in the same conversation as Twitter Bootstrap!

A total botched and missed opportunity.

------
ajross
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.

Is this an abuse of process I should actually care about or is it just a "who
did what?" spit between estranged developers?

~~~
evdawg
This appears to be an abuse of process from LayerVault.

They have a design in a style that's not quite originally theirs-- they've
seemingly abused the DMCA to have github remove a completely unrelated UI kit
in the same style.

The two items in question are as follows: <https://layervault.com/>
<http://designmodo.github.com/Flat-UI/>

Flat UI has (seemingly) been designed and developed completely independently,
having nothing to do with LayerVault. No artwork is derived, based-upon,
designed by the same artist, etc.

You should care about this because the process is biased towards the accuser.
Given no chance to rebut, Flat UI is removed, and disabled. Despite providing
his side of the story in the commit comments
[https://github.com/github/dmca/commit/735e17614cca63102b8414...](https://github.com/github/dmca/commit/735e17614cca63102b8414ed2846c3effbfe9535#commitcomment-2750768),
the author now has to write a _formal_ counter-takedown notification, and the
repository will _still_ be offline for up to 10 days
(<https://help.github.com/articles/dmca-takedown>)

Furthermore, 'designers' and HN users should care because LayerVault runs a
'Hacker News' for designers at <https://news.layervault.com/>. LayerVault is
not the right entity to run this site after these DMCA shenanigans (if in fact
no infringement has taken place).

~~~
elemeno
The rebuttal is a DMCA Counter-Notification. They're easy to write and just
asset that you do in fact own the copyright, or are otherwise authorised the
use the materials that the DMCA notice referred to. Once that's been done, the
host has to restore the removed content within a certain time period and the
issuers of the original notice have to take action directly against you (as in
sue you) if they want to pursue the issue further.

Before we start yelling about "abuse of process" though, we might want to wait
for more information about what's actually going on here. It would hardly be
the first time one small company has used another company's assets without
permission, so perhaps we should see what LayerVault has to say before getting
so worked up.

~~~
btilly
The host cannot restore that content within 10 days.

10 days can be a long time to have stuff go unexpectedly offline.

~~~
visarga
Could be the death of a website / community.

------
Daiz
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,
_anything_ 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.

Also, I think it's pretty ridiculous that a DMCA takedown can even be "valid"
without specifying _what_ exactly was infringed - _"I am the exclusive rights
holder for the artwork contained within Flat UI, Free Web User Interface Kit"_
isn't exactly saying much.

------
throwaway420
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 _major_ scumbag move that harms designers everywhere.

And that's a shame because I like Layer Vault _a lot_.

------
Duhck
Maybe Hacker News should send you a take down notice for copying HN with
"Designer News" aka DN?

<https://news.layervault.com/stories>

~~~
adamkochanowicz
Ha, this is totally a bubbly rip off of HN

~~~
SmeelBe
Absolutely!

------
bluetidepro
Whether this is true or false, I see this hurting LayerVault more than it's
worth fighting. It will be interesting to see this play out.

~~~
arkitaip
Agreed. Imagine if LayerVault had taken a more transparent and community
oriented approach and said: hey guys, the flat gui project is really cool and
we're delighted that it got inspired by our stuff, namely x, y, z (comparison
screenshots).

------
newishuser
You can't copyright a color pallet. You can't copyright an icon concept.

Sending DMCA take-downs without full intent to prosecute and full conviction
that your copyrights have been violated is not only illegal but shameful.

------
sobering
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.

They need to read up on W3's proposed contrast minimums:
<http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/#visual-audio-contrast-contrast>

------
kunai
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?

I guess pg should send a DMCA takedown notice to them, then.

------
ck2
I thought "look and feel" lawsuits over UI were settled long ago?

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Software#.22Look_and_feel...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Software#.22Look_and_feel.22_lawsuits)

~~~
Sujan
From the DMCA takedown letter:

> I am the exclusive rights holder for the artwork contained within Flat UI

That's quite a difference to "look and feel". Right now, there is just not
enough information to know what this is all about.

~~~
ck2
Not sure what "artwork" was copied if any.

If it was icons, I think a court said recently icons cannot be copyrighted?

Ah maybe it was thumbnails cannot be copyrighted.

------
camworld
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.

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.

This whole thing could have been handled a lot better and with far more
professionalism.

------
vicbrooker
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.

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.

Colours can be only trademarked. Using that colour is not a copyright
violation. Hence no DMCA.

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.

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.

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 :-/

I guess I just wish we could stop bickering about stuff like this and get on
with building cool stuff.

------
beernutz
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).

------
SmeelBe
I not see any resemblance between layervault project and Flat UI, colors are
different, icons too... explain please guys what is the problem?

~~~
free652
I checked the colors and they're different. They may look the same, also
square/flat interface is part of Windows 8.

~~~
jeremyjh
I'm pretty sure colors cannot be protected by copyright.

~~~
shabble
Whilst (afaik) unrelated to the DCMA claim at hand, it is possible to
_trademark_ a specific colour, with plenty of examples at [1], and there have
been controversial suits over 'infringement' in the past. My recollection is
that colour trademarks are much more restrictive in their coverage than other
forms, although I may be wrong there.

Edit: Emphasise the trademark-ability, not copyright-ability, of particular
colours/palettes.

[1] [http://www.businessinsider.com/colors-that-are-
trademarked-2...](http://www.businessinsider.com/colors-that-are-
trademarked-2012-9?op=1)

~~~
FootballMuse
Trademark infringement and copyright infringement are different things. The
DMCA only deals with copyright.

Plus, it is actually fairly difficult to trademark a color.

~~~
shabble
> _Trademark infringement and copyright infringement are different things._

Yes, I'm aware of that, and have edited original comment emphasise it. I had
vaguely thought there was some provision in the DMCA for remedies for other
types of IP infringement as well as copyright, but haven't really looked into
it that much. Then again, given how much easier it is to (potentially)
infringe some trademarks, the severity of the remedy (immediate takedown, with
perhaps later return) does seem like overkill.

I wasn't arguing that it was easy, merely possible. The examples all do seem
to be large companies with significant legal budgets and generally strong or
exclusive brands though, which does indicate it being quite rare.

------
dreamdu5t
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.

I'm repulsed at the idea of "owning" a visual depiction of a fucking
newspaper.

And yes, I've worked for years of my life as a designer. I know what if feels
like to have people copy you.

~~~
robmclarty
I'm not into people directly using the exact files I create myself (I mean, do
your own work). But I don't think anybody owns the idea of "three cogs", "a
newspaper that curls to the left", or "a head with a speech bubble". Don't get
me started on things like Coke owning a particular part of the red light
spectrum... Value comes from solving problems, not from a font, or a colour,
or a texture, or a style.

~~~
robmclarty
EDIT: When I say i'm not into it, I don't mean I mind people using things I've
made as building blocks for their own creations. I just think if you're going
to use something, make something new/better out of it.

------
stefanobernardi
The reality is that DesignModo is not new to this.

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.

<http://www.googleventures.com/> <http://designmodo.com/the-bricks-addons/>

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.

------
beatboxrevival
Always With Honor should go after LayerVault. Saul Bass should go after Always
With Honor. Picasso should go after Saul Bass.

Any designer that doesn't understand that design is an iterative process,
shouldn't be a designer anymore.

------
jbverschoor
Damn.. I think I'll send myself a DMCA notice, post it on HN and get lots of
traffic and noise around my brand

~~~
saiko-chriskun
this is not good noise :/

~~~
orangethirty
Of course it is. A DMCA take down has people look at their content and
download it. Any reasonably good business person would be able to twist this
into sales.

------
etchalon
I'm not a massive fan of the most of the responses in this thread.

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.

The three icons DesignModo removed were the most obvious offenders. And by
obvious, I mean, "Yeah, you completely ripped those".

So DesignModo has absolutely no right, in any sense, to be indignant. They
produced unoriginal, lazy, copied work, and got called out on it.

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.

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.

It's the COMBINATION of all of these factors which makes this a "rip".

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?

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?

It baffles the mind.

~~~
mrgoldenbrown
I think you are confused about what we are most upset about. You don't even
mention the DMCA once in your comment. The DMCA, and abuse of it, is something
that gets HN's dander up. As far as we can tell, LV perjured themselves,
either intentionally or through ignorance of what copyright actually means.
The result is that legal material will have been taken off the internet for 10
days, with no repercussions, despite the (presumably) false claims made by LV.
It is in this context that people are breaking out the pitchforks. If LV had
made a blog post complaining about the "rip", they probably would have gained
HN's sympathy.

~~~
etchalon
Reading through the comments, I do see a few mentions of the DMCA, but there's
plenty of "they don't own turquoise!" type comments as well.

If you're upset they used the DMCA (a legal tool made specifically for this
type of situation), I guess that's fair, if slightly myopic.

~~~
pifflesnort
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 turquoise, or on their
_style_ of icon, and thus _does not_ have the right to issue a _copyright_
DMCA take-down notice for content made in the same _style_ as their own.

[1] If a host follows the DMCA take-down process, in theory they're safe from
being sued for unwittingly and unintentionally _hosting_ copyrighted content.
in practice, those suites tend to happen anyway, with the claim that the
infringement was knowing -- see also youtube, megavideo).

~~~
etchalon
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.

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

~~~
etchalon
Sadly, no. I'm mostly going off Allan's comments on the DN thread where he
talks about them using their illustrations.

And also than they haven't been running around issuing DMCA's to every _other_
flat UI style everything.

Clearly, they believe specific assets were copied to the point that a DMCA was
appropriate. Pending a full post from LV, I'm giving them the benefit, as I'm
certainly not giving the benefit of the doubt to the designers who so
thoroughly ripped LV's style.

Should that post never come, or its contents show LV as trying to enforce a
copyright on something that was merely "inspired" and not copied, I'll change
my tone.

~~~
Bluestrike2
It doesn't matter. A valid DMCA takedown notice is fully self-contained.
There's no follow-up, no sending someone to a blog post, or anything else. If
it's not in the takedown, it's not material to the claim.

Refer to Perfect 10, Inc. v. Google if you're curious.

------
brendanobrien
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.

------
jcomis
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.

------
aubreyrhodes
Seems like their complaining about the news icon. Here's the DN icon and the
flat-ui icon side by side: [https://acr-
skitch.s3.amazonaws.com/news.png-20130306-130455...](https://acr-
skitch.s3.amazonaws.com/news.png-20130306-130455.png)

------
enra
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.

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.

~~~
craigching
I think that if they hadn't gone DMCA on Design Modo there would be a lot more
sympathy here. Until LV shows that copyright was infringed (show us the
_exact_ copies), I'm on the side of "the DMCA was used incorrectly here and
even maliciously."

------
3amOpsGuy
The designmodo logo is quite debian-esque. Maybe too close to debian's i'd
think.

EDIT:
[https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/7d9027189b18855f5f2ddeb7d...](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/7d9027189b18855f5f2ddeb7db62311c.jpg)

~~~
DanBC
Eh, they're just logos. They're pretty different.

Ignoring the colour (red on white VS white on blue) and the distressing of the
Debian logo vs the cleanness of the designmodo logo there's the opening of the
spiral - Debian curve starts at 6 o clock, while designmodo starts at 4:30 or
5 o clock. And the inside of the Debian loop goes further.

~~~
pyre
But they're _similar_. They were _obviously_ copied with willful and malicious
intent! DMCA sent!

[ Note that the DN logo and the FlatUI newspaper icon that have been held up
as examples by LV are about as similar as these two icons. ]

~~~
3amOpsGuy
_doesnt bother shaking head in dismay, just wanders off_

------
DannoHung
If these layervault dickholes really believed so strongly in this, they'd
issue a DMCA against designmodo's webhost.

But then designmodo would absolutely be forced to defend itself and layervault
would be liable in court.

DMCA is a bunch of bullshit.

------
timparker
Reply from LayerVault - [https://news.layervault.com/stories/1992-layervault-
whats-up...](https://news.layervault.com/stories/1992-layervault-whats-up-
with-the-dmca)

------
justjimmy
Does anyone have a active subscription to Layervault?

Here's the Flat UI designs: <http://designmodo.github.com/Flat-UI/>

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).

Layervault <https://layervault.com/>

The issue is artwork/illustration.

------
melvinmt
I like the way how Github handles DMCA requests by the way, everything's out
in the open, including the lame claims people come up with.

------
ebbv
Really glad I downloaded Flat UI yesterday before this crap started 'coz I'm
gonna be using it for a project this weekend.

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.

~~~
mrkmcknz
Would you be kind enough to email me a copy.

username at gmail

~~~
gurumx
You could just download it by inspecting <http://designmodo.github.com/Flat-
UI/>

~~~
kennethlove
That's a 404.

I'd love a copy too, actually. Just the CSS. username @gmail.com as well, if
you'd be so kind.

------
justjimmy
This is why we can't have nice things.

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.)

Just speechless.

~~~
pixl97
Apple does go after other designs that are similar to theirs, but (big BUT),
they don't use DMCA unless there was an actual copy of their artwork/software.
They file an injunction with a judge to stop sales of the product and/or sue
them in civil court.

------
lucaspiller
Anyone got a clone of flat-ui?

------
damncabbage
The DMCA counter-notice has been submitted:
[https://github.com/github/dmca/commit/6a33a213e04e7fc5e74ce3...](https://github.com/github/dmca/commit/6a33a213e04e7fc5e74ce3cab80fee778f641acc)

------
fuddle
It is still available for download on their site: <http://designmodo.com/flat-
free/>

------
mambodog
When you use an overly simplistic visual style, don't be surprised when it
turns out to be very easy to rip off.

------
creullin
Coders Twitter account <https://twitter.com/iurevych>

------
mattwdelong
Does anyone notice a striking similarity between the "Debian swirl" and the e
in Designmodo?

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".

~~~
tobyjsullivan
Everything in design is inspired. This has been a basis for debate since the
beginning of copyright law but it has been decided for a long time that
inspiration alone is in no way infringement.

------
torbit
Nice color scheme. I just copied it to colourlovers.com. Now many can enjoy
it.

------
binaryorganic
Now the "no design skills required" slogan from their site makes perfect
sense.

------
bratao
Anyone can provide a mirror ?

------
bzelip
so disappointing when our generation(s) act to limit the Internet. LayerVault
please stop, we really dig ur stuff.

------
SmeelBe
true tweet! - <https://twitter.com/iconfinder/status/309337478207262720>

~~~
rustc
Looks like it was deleted. What was it?

~~~
SmeelBe
here is screenshot - <http://i.imm.io/Ynhs.png>

~~~
BaconJuice
imgur please. Only one I can view at work =/

------
saiko-chriskun
anyone manage to clone the repo?

~~~
bwsewell
I found a link to it... please only use for investigative purposes:

<http://ge.tt/19rXMGa/v/0?c>

------
SmeelBe
let me guess, the next one you're going to report is microsoft, or google?

------
recoiledsnake
Someone please lend LayerVault some contrast.

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

<http://i.imgur.com/cMO4lxA.png>

<http://i.imgur.com/JnaZdN7.png>

I cannot believe a "top notch" design house can get this so wrong.

Edit: Designer News seems to suffer from the same affliction.

<https://news.layervault.com/>

A lot of sites that are HN these days seem to lack contrast, what's up with
that?

~~~
colmvp
I hope you realize that the main audience of layervault and designer news is
designers. Their site (which I've seen many times before) looks fine on my
screen. And I would be willing to wager a bet that the majority of their core
audience would have decent/pretty good screens.

I'm all about usability but I'm also lenient when the audience isn't as wide
as what Amazon or eBay have to cater to.

I think it's a little unnerving that you'd put 'top notch.' None of those
examples are break it for me as a designer and a potential customer. Overall
the style and feel of the site is significantly memorable and it's a site that
I've come back to time and time again.

~~~
threedaymonk
> I hope you realize that the main audience of layervault and designer news is
> designers.

That statement disturbs me a bit, because it seems to imply that contrast and
readability aren't important to designers, and that designers are grudgingly
humouring us normals when they make designs with legible text sizes in
readable colour combinations for our ugly utilitarian sites.

I don't think that's true, though. I've been lucky enough to work with some
very talented designers with the ability to make things that are both elegant
and readable. Anything else is just narcissistic posing, after all.

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

~~~
dzlobin
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>

~~~
pifflesnort
There's no proof. All they've said so far seems to demonstrate a lack of
understanding about what copyright actually is, as well as a general case of
business immaturity.

------
largesse
What are the penalties for a false DMCA claim?

~~~
saiko-chriskun
There really should be more penalties for this.

~~~
largesse
Apparently, the notices say "under penalty of perjury", but at the very least
you should be able to sue abusers civilly. I'm just not sure that is a great
recourse for open source.

DMCA needs reform on this. There needs to be scale of fines for parties that
issue takedowns based upon false copyright claims.

~~~
dangrossman
The part that's "under penalty of perjury" is only the statement that you are
authorized to act on behalf of a copyright holder, not that your claims are
true.

------
largesse
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.

~~~
escaped_hn
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. :)

------
ryanAmurphy
Maybe they own a few hex codes.

------
SmeelBe
True! - <https://twitter.com/awmichel/status/309341548980625409>

