2 ms·

The work is all original, no code or images were copied. As I stated in my post, I'll be changing my personal design shortly.

dcurtis 15y ago
If you precisely replicated the New York Times website and posted one called The Old Vork Times, do you think they wouldn't care? This is not original. You copied my design work.
- rms 15y ago
  Copied your work. It's ridiculous, of course, but you won't win any fans here with linguistic imprecision.
- judofyr 15y ago
  There are two aspects here: One is the visual design, and even the author agrees that it's probably too similar: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3744356 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3744356 The other is the idea/concept. Creating open-source versions of unique ideas is nothing new and I doubt you'll see much sympathy on this front.
  - cleal 15y ago
    I'm wondering how is this very different from MS Office vs. LibreOffice... Granted, latest incarnations of MS's products are a bit different with the (crappy) ribbon and all, but LO is quite similar to previous versions of Office. And I'm talking both about UI, design and functionality. Think Excel/Calc functions, for example.
  - 54mf 15y ago
    Right, and as Mr. Curtis said, the author copied his design work. Mr. Curtis isn't crying fowl that someone built an open-source blog engine.
- jvrossb 15y ago
  If you copied the articles, yes. If you copied the design using none of their assets or code, no. Copying it definitely is, stealing it definitely isn't (at least not in the legal sense, the moral sense is debatable.) You should have confidence that you will win because you can implement it better, understand the need better, can craft better solutions faster, and have better content on your network. If those things aren't true and all you had was an idea, unfortunately this was bound to happen. Ideas alone are not defensible, practically or even legally. Successful implementations thereof can be however.
kellysutton 15y ago
I am not one to start arguments online, but I believe you should double-check your definition of original or buy a new dictionary.
- __david__ 15y ago
  No, he is correct and you are wrong. "Original", as used here, is a term of art that means "not infringing anyone's copyright". Like it or not, "look and feel" has not been established to be copyrightable. Just ask Apple: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Micros...
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
2muchcoffeeman 15y ago
You really should never have copied the design at all. That is not even where most of the value of Curtis's idea is...
- nwienert 15y ago
  Agreed, and I apologized. I've changed it. 4 lines of code diff. Cheers!
marcedwards 15y ago
You've deliberately recreated someone's work with the intention of offering a competing product. Legalities aside, it's pretty damn rude. Yes, it's a rip-off. (I don't use that phrase lightly and I'm usually all for remixing, which this isn't.)
tomelders 15y ago
It's behaviour like this that leads people/companies to seek the protection of software patents. Thanks for totally muddying the water, crossing the line, breaking an unwritten rule and not being a "team player". You quite simply suck.

dcurtis 15y ago

If you precisely replicated the New York Times website and posted one called The Old Vork Times, do you think they wouldn't care? This is not original. You copied my design work.

rms 15y ago
Copied your work. It's ridiculous, of course, but you won't win any fans here with linguistic imprecision.
judofyr 15y ago
There are two aspects here: One is the visual design, and even the author agrees that it's probably too similar: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3744356 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3744356 The other is the idea/concept. Creating open-source versions of unique ideas is nothing new and I doubt you'll see much sympathy on this front.
- cleal 15y ago
  I'm wondering how is this very different from MS Office vs. LibreOffice... Granted, latest incarnations of MS's products are a bit different with the (crappy) ribbon and all, but LO is quite similar to previous versions of Office. And I'm talking both about UI, design and functionality. Think Excel/Calc functions, for example.
- 54mf 15y ago
  Right, and as Mr. Curtis said, the author copied his design work. Mr. Curtis isn't crying fowl that someone built an open-source blog engine.
jvrossb 15y ago
If you copied the articles, yes. If you copied the design using none of their assets or code, no. Copying it definitely is, stealing it definitely isn't (at least not in the legal sense, the moral sense is debatable.) You should have confidence that you will win because you can implement it better, understand the need better, can craft better solutions faster, and have better content on your network. If those things aren't true and all you had was an idea, unfortunately this was bound to happen. Ideas alone are not defensible, practically or even legally. Successful implementations thereof can be however.

kellysutton 15y ago

I am not one to start arguments online, but I believe you should double-check your definition of original or buy a new dictionary.

__david__ 15y ago
No, he is correct and you are wrong. "Original", as used here, is a term of art that means "not infringing anyone's copyright". Like it or not, "look and feel" has not been established to be copyrightable. Just ask Apple: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Micros...
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

2muchcoffeeman 15y ago

You really should never have copied the design at all. That is not even where most of the value of Curtis's idea is...

nwienert 15y ago
Agreed, and I apologized. I've changed it. 4 lines of code diff. Cheers!

marcedwards 15y ago

You've deliberately recreated someone's work with the intention of offering a competing product. Legalities aside, it's pretty damn rude. Yes, it's a rip-off. (I don't use that phrase lightly and I'm usually all for remixing, which this isn't.)

tomelders 15y ago

It's behaviour like this that leads people/companies to seek the protection of software patents. Thanks for totally muddying the water, crossing the line, breaking an unwritten rule and not being a "team player". You quite simply suck.