The linked article doesn't include any useful details. For example, was the cloned content open-source? If so, and if the originator's copyright notice was carr

The linked article doesn't include any useful details. For example, was the cloned content open-source? If so, and if the originator's copyright notice was carried forward, the author loses the right to complain. If not the above, if the cloned content was unprotected and similar to other products designed for the same purpose, the clone can be defended as a form obvious to a practitioner of the art -- this argument goes that it's difficult to avoid similarities, like two simple mousetraps that resemble one another for reasons other than deliberate copying. But as I said above, the article only complains, without offering any relevant details.