Please note: This site's design is only visible in a graphical browser that supports Web standards, but its content is accessible to any browser or Internet device. To see this site as it was designed please upgrade to a Web standards compliant browser.
Signal vs. Noise

Our book:
Defensive Design for the Web: How To Improve Error Messages, Help, Forms, and Other Crisis Points
Available Now ($16.99)

Most Popular (last 15 days)
Looking for old posts?
37signals Mailing List

Subscribe to our free newsletter and receive updates on 37signals' latest projects, research, announcements, and more (about one email per month).

37signals Services
XML version (full posts)
Get Firefox!

Community, Design, Lifestyle, STEALING

08 Jul 2004 by Jason Fried

Anyone else think this site looks like Coudal’s new site? We’re sure Coudal came first. At least they thanked Coudal in their CSS file. Problem is they didn’t ask permission first.

58 comments so far (Post a Comment)

08 Jul 2004 | Mike said...

How come it seems that whenever a major weblog/design site gets ripped off, it's by someone in another country?

I've had my website ripped by two separate people in two Baltic countries so far this year. I mean what gives? Do they think we won't be able to find them because they don't live in the USA? Gimme a friggin' break.

08 Jul 2004 | Dave Marks said...

My first reaction was cheaky so and so's. Then i took a side by side comparison and decided enough was different.

Then looking at them both zoomed out as it was - I'm sorry but i think this is too close.

The article title font/size and with the caption above too - I'm sorry, if i was Coudal I'd be asking them to take it down. And seens as Coudal themselves have only just released this design, i'd been really quite miffed

I guess they thought leaving the copyright info was enough, but that alone doesn't give permission to use something without asking. Doesn't "All Rights Reserved" mean anything to these people...

08 Jul 2004 | Dave Marks said...

Just re-read what i said and my point may have not been clear - using a design as inspiration and clearly just ripping it off is too different things. Its not just the basic 3 col, main header layout they have used but also the whole look and feel.

08 Jul 2004 | rabbit said...

Not to mention that they forgot to change the link on the top right image...

08 Jul 2004 | Jonathan Snook said...

It's funny how when a design is copied, it's never done as well as the original. The Coudal site is packed with content and really works with the layout. The Panic site feels too airy but in the wrong places. The navigation doesn't look like navigation and seems out of place. It needs a redesign and in a way that would actually pull it away from looking so much like the Coudal site.

08 Jul 2004 | Tomas said...

Eh, when you click on the "Panic" logo, you go to the Coudal website.

08 Jul 2004 | Jeremy Flint said...

Amazing how quickly the ripoff showed up. Wasn't it just a week or so ago that Coudal redesigned?

I can see evidence of where they tried to modify the design so that it isn't an exact ripoff, but it is only seperated from the Coudal design by about 1 degree.

08 Jul 2004 | Bryan Haggerty said...

There seems to be a lot of talk lately about "pirated" sites. People have said every song has been written. I sometimes feel that way about web design too. The Panic case is a clear copy but some of the sites I've seen on Pirated Sites are very vague look-a-likes.

As I come across sites they inspire me and I'll pick and choose elements and components and create an entirely new design but by the definition of Pirated Sites that is considered stealing.

Cameron Moll wrote a good article on SitePoint about the "problem" of people stealing design ideas from eachother.

I'm not a design stealer sympathizer but in many cases I feel that some people are really reaching (The Panic case aside since yes that is a clear rip).

08 Jul 2004 | Paolo said...

My stomach churned at the obvious theft. What's worse is is this quote:

As a web designer, i look for perfection in my work, and inspiration in the work of others. The perfect places to find both of those are "award sites". I have picked some of my personal favourites. Here's my top 5 list:

Typically Coudal didn't make his "top 5".

This is exactly why I have yet to settle on a design for my own blog as I'm constantly hyper sensitive to how certain elements I've tried looked too much like someone else's efforts. My drawing board is getting tired.

08 Jul 2004 | Anthony Casalena said...

Seems the dividing line between the "flattering" version of copying and the "stealing" version can usually be determined by actual code similarity. It's hard to have your design end up so close if you didn't actually _copy_ any code, just like it's hard to write the same paper as someone in a college course unless you actually copied their text. Anyone having something more than even 20% similarity code wise is probably up to no good.

So, all visuals aside, the fact that they had to credit Coudal, and the hilarious point that clicking their logo takes you to Coudal's website, is pretty indicative of just plain stealing.

Did you catch the clone via the referrer log from this? :)

08 Jul 2004 | Matt Pennell said...

"we are full of ideas and power that is required to create unique products"

They're full of something, alright...

08 Jul 2004 | Coudal said...

Did you catch the clone via the referrer log from this? :)

Yep. Smart huh?

08 Jul 2004 | beto said...

How come it seems that whenever a major weblog/design site gets ripped off, it's by someone in another country?

And in 99% of the cases that country happens to be somewhere in the Far East.

There's a very fine line between using good site design as references for "inspiration" and flat-out stealing. You don't need to be a design whiz to tell how this is nothing about "inspiration" and all about taking the easiest route - grab someone's site design, change a few things, and voila - instant "coolness factor". Evidence is all around that site. And the "designer"'s attempts to justify it just make the whole thing much more laughable.

08 Jul 2004 | Anil said...

How come it seems that whenever a major weblog/design site gets ripped off, it's by someone in another country?

Because there are different cultural standards about what's considered property, what constitutes theft, and what the concept of ownership includes. Many people in other countries aren't being malicious when they do this, they're just following local custom of what's considered okay.

This site appears to be in Lithuania. Is there anyone in the SvN community who knows Lithuanian culture well enough to say whether simply maintaining credit in a CSS file is considered enough credit? Might it not be more productive, instead of having another Pirated Sites pile-on, to email this person and explain that this sort of appropriation is considered rude/unethical/inappropriate here and ask them to make some changes or ask permission before launching?

Considering how many of you are designers, and how much of design is about knowing your audience, I'm surprised people aren't trying to understand the behavior before labelling it with a tag as emotionally weighted as "stealing".

08 Jul 2004 | JF said...

Considering how many of you are designers, and how much of design is about knowing your audience, I'm surprised people aren't trying to understand the behavior before labelling it with a tag as emotionally weighted as "stealing".

Come on, Anil. Taking someone else's work (creative or not) without permission, and then making it your own (especially for profit) is stealing. We'll have to hash this out over a beer in Portland next week.

simply maintaining credit in a CSS file is considered enough credit

Isn't this more about permission than credit?

Perhaps I'm being insensitive to their culture (completely possible), but perhaps THEY are really the insensitive ones. The burden should fall on the copier, not the copied, to make sure it's ok.

08 Jul 2004 | Don Schenck said...

What really irks me (ack?) is that it's not a site for, say, selling leather mittens or car chains; it's a frickin' designer! How ... how ... just wrong.

Hmmmm ... good guerilla marketing idea: make a near-copy of your *own* site, and then complain that someone stole it. Instant publicity.

I'm not not NOT accusing Coudal of that ... the idea just occured to me.

My son says I have a great criminal mind -- it's a dark gift.

08 Jul 2004 | BradNelson said...

When I designed my site, I made sure to give credit to my inspirations. Though the design morphed a bit from them, I was still concerned about "ripping them off." Of course, at this day and age, you have to be really creative/innovative to have a design that isn't close to what someone else has done.

08 Jul 2004 | Ian Fenn said... looks familiar...

08 Jul 2004 | Jeff Minard said...

JF said... Perhaps I'm being insensitive to their culture (completely possible)...

You most most definately are.

American values would automatically call foul play on this type of rip off, but in many, many countries you would be lucky if they even gave the originator credit for the idea. It's very common place in other locals to use ideas, concepts, and even the product as your own. In those places it is acceptable because everyone does it, so no one gets mad about it like we (I live in SF) do.

However, the web is multi-national, so in this respect, I would say that they have wronged Coudal - however, due to the differences in local ethics, I would not jump down their throats, but would inform them that I was unhappy with what they have done and to reconsider their design.

08 Jul 2004 | Anthony said...

I'm surprised people aren't trying to understand the behavior before labelling it with a tag as emotionally weighted as "stealing".

We're referring to a purported instance of plagiarism here.

It seems that even if another culture would permit such activity as reasonable, it would still fall subject to a test of rationality. I think it'd be quite hard to defend that plagiarism is somehow a good thing.

My previous comment, actually, was directed at understanding the perhaps unintentional behavior that may lead to such plagiarism (starting from someone's code is different than starting after visually looking at their site--you won't be able to re-produce exact code, and can easily avoid plagiarism).

Your second point regarding disclosure is a very good one. Even in the rare situation that someone capable of producing even a portion of a website is completely unaware of how plagiarism might work, the whole ordeal can often easily be settled without public fanfare.

The gut reaction to disclose is quite easily understandable, though.

08 Jul 2004 | but that's just me said...

Anil, whether it's stealing or not, the larger atrocity here is the one Don points out. This is a site for a DESIGN firm and they can't come up with something original from the depths of their creative little minds?! I'm not even a designer and I'm appalled at this. It makes you wonder what they do for their they copy other people's sites for their projects? SAD.

And, yeah, this is clearly stealing. Using someone else's work practically verbatim without much the definition of theft.

The fact that the Panic logo links straight to the Coudal site is

08 Jul 2004 | f5 said...

I really can't help but laugh at the irony here...let's remember back to Coudal's last site and logo redesign. Their new logo wasn't actually designed by them, it was actually copied from an existing floor tile from an old church. (scroll to the bottom).

08 Jul 2004 | Darrel said...

Wow. That Panic site has some of the worst copywriting/editing I've ever seen.

08 Jul 2004 | Michael Spina said...

"This is a site for a DESIGN firm and they can't come up with something original from the depths of their creative little minds?!"

I consider it deceiving to their clients, as well as stealing. A designer's site is part of a portfolio, probably the biggest part, and is in many cases the first impression of the quality of the designer's work. To assume the site is orginal a client will be misled.

08 Jul 2004 | Paul said...

f5: Coudal isn't selling floor tiles, nor constructing old churches. I think the issue here is that Panic is a design company who has ripped off the site of another design company. In business, that speaks volumes.

08 Jul 2004 | f5 said...

Paul: I understand there are differences. However as Anil and others have pointed out, there are real, cultural differences in what is and isn't acceptable here and judging the situation based soley on U.S. or western-centric values isn't a good way to approach it.

The reason I brought up their logo is becuase it wasn't just inspired by old Basillica floors, it was copied directly from old Basillica floors. I don't care how far removed from the original, blah's still pretty ironic.

08 Jul 2004 | mckenna said...

If you ask me, Coudal had it coming! How long did they expect to kick everyone's ass without someone ripping them off?

In all honesty, it's a bummer. It goes beyond the old "flattery" line...

08 Jul 2004 | Taylor Garries said...

Interesting aside, the Chevrolet "bow-tie" was copied from a wallpaper in a Parisian hotel.

08 Jul 2004 | Coudal said...

I didn't mean to start a whole big thing. Mostly, I was miffed that they thought our site was good enough to pinch our CSS file but we still couldn't crack their "top 5 list."

08 Jul 2004 | Taylor Garries said...

Coudal: I didn't mean to start a whole big thing. Mostly, I was miffed that they thought our site was good enough to pinch our CSS file but we still couldn't crack their "top 5 list."

Of course you wouldn't be on the top 5 list; prospective clients would find out that they steal site designs. Unless they're trying to cater to an underserved market: clients that want other company's websites. How often have you had a client ask if they could have XYZ Company site, only with their logo on it?

09 Jul 2004 | Justin French said...

They look far too similar. There's inspiration, and there's stealing — this is stealing.

What baffles me is that they think they'll get away with it. I know the web is billions of pages, but in reality, it's a very small place with a tight-knit community. 6° of separation and all that.

09 Jul 2004 | Jose Rui Fernandes said...

Of course this is stealing and not plagiarism, in fact Panic don't bothers in hiding the fact (what turns this somewhat unique).
But, this post is an overreaction. You want to compare your life as designers with a designer in Lithuania? I can't even imagine how is life in Lithuania, little more than 10 years away from the USSR! What I know is they're immigrating by the thousands. In my country we have doctors, engineers, professors from Lithuania, Ukraine, Estonia working in everything you can imagine. I'm amazed how they have 341.000 web users (the CIA says 500.000 in 2002) and web designers or "web designers". You probably don't understand this, but I was hmm... touched by the effusive way they thank Coudal.
This is like a football (soccer) player in the third division trying to imitate Zidane, Figo or Beckam. Means nothing.
I think Coudal should ask them to remove the CSS, but maybe he can send a spare design to them. With time they will learn (how to design and to respect the work of others), because they're smart and great workers.

09 Jul 2004 | Ditto said...

I really can't help but laugh at the irony here...let's remember back to Coudal's last site and logo redesign. Their new logo wasn't actually designed by them, it was actually copied from an existing floor tile from an old church.

point, set, match.

09 Jul 2004 | ek said...

My god, this moral relativism is sickening.

Copying someone else's work essentially verbatim and positioning it as your own is wrong, no matter what country or culture you're from.

There's no ifs, ands or buts about it. I don't care if this person grew up at the bottom of a well in Uzbekistan or in the posh suburbs of Connecticut.

If they wanted to "thank" Coudal they could have...hmmm, let me think...thanked him.

Man, this lefty b.s. is so amazingly condescending. Essentially, you're saying Lithuanians are so backward and such rubes that the rules of common decency need not apply.

My, how adorable of this third-rate idiot from the backwaters of Europe to show his admiration for a mighty American design firm by appropriating said firm's work and promoting it as his own! He's just so precious!


09 Jul 2004 | Douglas said...

> There's no ifs, ands or buts about it.

That's called Americal Imperialism, imposing your views on someone else.

Copying things isn't new, it is the speed at which we can trace the copying which has changed. The men who built that Romanesque church will never know about their work being copied hundreds of years later. It is still a design firm using work from another design firm (even if that older design firm would never have called itself that!)

That photo of the buildings on the Panic site: noone is bashing them for using a photo of a building they didn't build. For stealing the work of the archetects. It is just harder to know which building it is, to the point that we don't really care. The same with the logo, I bet that's inspired from somwhere else too.

IMO, the CSS isn't all that complicated anyway. If they stole the content and images too, then it would be a real problem. A bit of CSS isn't the end of the world.

If it is that big a deal, give them a phone: +370 6 58 10910. Should be easy to sort it out.


09 Jul 2004 | Don Schenck said...

Cool ... "Thou Shalt Not Steal" is no longer Biblical ... it's "American Imperialism".

Neat. I guess "Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor's Wife" is ... hmmmm ... bigotry?


09 Jul 2004 | Mike said...

Yeah get real guys. They stole it. They barely gave credit. They didn't ask permission. Stop playing this guy like the downtrodden hero.

In some countries stealing may be okay.

But remember, in others, you get your hands chopped off for stealing oranges.

09 Jul 2004 | Carl said...

I love how we (the US) are the only ones who need to be culturally sensitive. How about this guy being culturally sensitive enough to check to see how we feel about stealing?

09 Jul 2004 | but that's just me said...

Watch out, Don. I think the Supreme Court can now have people removed from blogs for quoting the Ten Commandments. ;-)

Very good points, ek and Mike. Some here are making it sound as if living in a destitute culture justifies stealing or that just because some people think stealing is no big deal that makes it excusable.

Scenario: A homeless guy breaks into your house and steals everything you have worked your butt off to obtain. He's destitute. He has nothing. Among the homeless people he knows, there's nothing wrong with stealing. Does that justify his violating your home? Or, after finding out he's homeless, would you excuse his actions and just call it "borrowing" so as to not impose your views on him?

09 Jul 2004 | Don Schenck said...

Les Miserables!

I can't speak for Coudal, but: If a person in a poor country or even a poor situation simply ASKED me for help/instruction/code, I'd be more than happy to help them.

In fact -- and I know I shouldn't tell this -- every year I actively seek out a computer programmer in a developing nation that I do not know and send them a stack of books of their choosing.

But if they stole my books or code ... I'd be very upset. Scratch that; if they stole my cigars, I'd be HUGELY upset.

09 Jul 2004 | pid said...

Does anyone not think that this 'firm' might actually be a bunch of enthusiastic teenage lithuanian proto-web-designers trying to make out that they are professional?

Just email them and tell them off, or point out on the web groups they mention on their site, that they've ripped the design off.

"Calm down dear, it's just a commercial."

09 Jul 2004 | but that's just me said...

Exactly, Don. Back to the homeless person analogy, most of the time when a homeless person asks me for money, I'll give it to him. But if he were to steal money from me...totally different story.

09 Jul 2004 | Jose Rui Fernandes said...

Exactly what was missing here: left, right and biblical enlightenment. One thing great about moral standards is that everyone can have their own. And even that ones are very, very flexible.
ek: that's great to be able to explain everything with one word.
Don: If I remember, for Jesus, there's a difference between a thief in the temple or a thief that steal for eat (or because they don't know better). Also, in the same book I think there's something about sins and throw the first stone...
btjms: Every legal system recognizes the circumstances and context. It's not acceptable, but it's different to steal your house for eat or for dope, with or without violence, etc...
Scenario: Microsoft has this MSN Search site that even a photocopier couldn't do better. They throw some "innovation ŕ la MS" and they're in business (again). What's worst? The Lithuanian guy or Microsoft, or they're equal, or Microsoft never steals?
That said, looking closer at the site, I think you're guys are pretty much right. Everything looks fake or stolen. In the work they have listed a poster for Nike... I must agree they're not exactly examples of honesty. It puzzles me why the site is in english (are they after the "international market"?).
But, I still think it means nothing.

09 Jul 2004 | Don Schenck said...

Jose, I don't remember a reference where Jesus said you could steal if you were hungry or didn't know better. Where is that?

And the "Let He who is without sin cast the first stone" reference ... where to start? Without a lengthy exigesis, I will at least say that there's much more to that particular verse and the associated event. If He meant we could never judge, then ... well ... we'd have no legal system, eh?

Stealing is stealing, and it's wrong. Even if it's purloining ... like, say, spending time at work posting on Signal vs. Noise.

(OUCH! I just "cut" myself!)

09 Jul 2004 | but that's just me said...

Actually, if you want to get Biblical...

The Bible does not offer excuses for stealing. In fact, in Proverbs 6:30-31 (NLT), it says you might come up with excuses, but the thief will still pay.

"Excuses might be found for a thief who steals because he is starving. But if he is caught, he will be fined seven times as much as he stole, even if it means selling everything in his house to pay it back."

As far as judging goes, a lot of people think the Bible says to not judge at all, when in fact it says to judge fairly and to show mercy.

Zechariah 7:9:
"This is what the LORD Almighty says: Judge fairly and honestly, and show mercy and kindness to one another."

To Jose's point, yes, we all steal in one way or another, but I don't think one form of stealing is any worse than the next. If you steal a pen from work or steal a computer, it's still stealing and it's still wrong. Morally, there's no difference. Legally, yes, there are different degrees and the offender is typically judged according to the severity of the crime.

But just because we all steal, that doesn't mean we can't judge others who do. It means that we should judge them in the way we would be judged for doing the same. When the Bible says "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone," it not only means that all of us sin, but that we should first look at ourselves before we judge others.

So, those of you who are saying to show leniency are on the right track. I don't think anyone here has said that the Panic people should burn. All that has been said is that they did, indeed, steal.

09 Jul 2004 | sparky said...

Is anyone else worried that Time Magazine or any number of publication designers from the 70's might see, and be really miffed?

Putting the sarcasm aside, I've yet to see any commentary that points out that while the new Coudal look is certainly interesting for the web, its hardly innovative. Especially, considering that the last 2-3 years has seen an outpouring of publication design rehashing the giant serif'ed headlines of yesteryear, and obvious three-column grids. Don’t get me wrong, its pretty stuff, but if it isn’t pastiche, its most certainly referential.

“Out of the closets and into the museums, libraries, architectural monuments, concert halls, bookstores, recording studios and film studios of the world. Everything belongs to the inspired and dedicated thief. . . . Words, colors, light, sounds, stone, wood, bronze belong to the living artist. They belong to anyone who can use them. Loot the Louvre! A bas l'originalité, the sterile and assertive ego that imprisons us as it creates. Vive le sol -- pure, shameless, total. We are not responsible. Steal anything in sight.”
William S. Burroughs “Les Voleurs”

10 Jul 2004 | Jose Rui Fernandes said...

Don and btjms: Despite I had a catholic education, my bible days are long over, sorry about that -- but I did read the book and studied it. But to judge fairly and show mercy that's my point. I still think there's a big difference between a stole paper clip and the Enron scandal. You can't say it's wrong the same way. They're equal, but one is more equal than the other (I just stole a phrase).
Regarding the "first stone" I was talking about the Coudal logo some people pointed. I mean the grey area here. I don't agree with the thesis that Coudal stole the logo. That's a grey area because it's intellectual property, not Don's cigars. Everybody can still use the Coudal page, but something was stole from there.
I think in music there's a number of equal notes that define a plagiarism. But even with that rule there's some music nothing more than samples and more samples, and dub and whatever, that fall in the grey area. And the art the same. And design too. When a guy invents a logo with the Tide look and feel, it's steal or not? They can say it's an irony, a political statement but it's also an appropriation of an idea.
I used the big letters like Coudal in my design days (with Pagemill 1.0). They were gifs of Akzidenz Grotesk if I remember. But I've got the inspiration from the Face and Arena magazines and their bold titles. I'm not a genius and not everybody have the capacity and context to invent styles. For me a style it's not something we should throw away just because it's already invented. Besides, the world wants the designer to use the trendy style of the time, in typefaces, layout, images... A designer can't escape the style of the moment (or just a few can). So, for me it's legitimate to use the 70's Time look (if this is correct) and a logo from the floor. Coudal worked the ideas enough to do something at least partially new.
What's really amazing here it's the velocity the new Coudal ideas were appropriated. I mean, one week ago, 37signals were jealous and the next thing you know there's a Coudal page in Lithuania.

12 Jul 2004 | Tom said...

Cameron Moll (of the web predictions a few days ago) seems to made another sound prediction: "Good Designers Copy, Great Designers Steal"

Well - except maybe for the "great" bit...

P.S. Up with moral relativism. It's the only right answer. ;-)

12 Jul 2004 | beto said...

On the "stealing OK there/not OK here" dilemma... well, if that's as true as it seems, that just goes to show how cultural and ethic differences can clash in the -never better said- World Wide Web (despite attempts by some of making it an "USA Wide Web"). This may sound like stretching it, but in the very long term this may well lead to a complete eveluation/rebuilding of our increasingly stiffening and moronic convention/vicious circle of patents / lawsuits, and who knows, even render the concept of countries useless... which is definitely not a bad thing at all, as one of the key elements of wars would cease to be.

(end of tree-hugger optimistic hippie mode)

13 Jul 2004 | Tomas said...

I'm sorry for these lithuanians... I didn't know about this "company" before. We have better designers ( etc.).

13 Jul 2004 | katiba said...

Discussions about this affair have already broken out on the premises of the lithuanian blogosphere. The comments mostly reflect a hilarious disposition among the readers, many of whom, myself included, are professional IT experts. Lithuania is _not_ a famished, deserted, moneyless land, and it is absolutely possible to earn a living on webdesign, programming and other technical fields. There exists more than one company respected and widely-known locally as well as abroad. Among these, not only overall honesty may be observed, but also the practicing of such simple solutions as moving to open-source software, rather than using the (more common in these lands) pirated products.
It seems that yet again judgements leading to stereotypes are always based on the worst examples. Too bad.

14 Jul 2004 | Panic said...


First of all i would like to apologise all of you. Fact remains a fact. We ripped the site's CSS layout, and i (as a head of the company) am fully responsible for everything my team did. Sorry.

The site design was offered by a freelancer that worked for us, i did not double check the code, and did not see it was actualy a rip. I am realy sorry for this whole mess.

Now, the situation is even more complicated, because we are low on time and budget to develop another design from a scratch for our homepage. We can't take it down, so we will try to make it look different, and feel different. Please help us out on this one with your comments.

Thanks for your time and understanding,
Paul Uza

14 Jul 2004 | Free Lance the Freelancer! said...

Paul - everyone blames it on the freelancer. Try again.

14 Jul 2004 | alex said...

Is your "worth" determined by the outcome or by the experience?

15 Jul 2004 | Carl said...

Ahh, the I'm out of time excuse. Yeah, ok. Whatever.

15 Jul 2004 | Fish Sauce said...

"Copying someone else's work essentially verbatim and positioning it as your own is wrong, no matter what country or culture you're from."

Up until around the renaissance, intellectual property wasn't considered property the way a pot or a horse was, and it wasn't until almost the Victorian age when things like plagiarism became as serious as they are today. Quoting your bible doesn't mean anything, because the people who wrote it wouldn't have recognized this as theft, because they wouldn't have recognized it as property to be stolen. Actually, until the renaissance, copying old work and changing as little as possible was more often than not considered a virtue rather than a failing.

Yes we consider it wrong now in our culture, but let's not get all "since the dawn of time" about this, because you can't travel very far down that road on this issue.

That being said, it is a total rip, and completely unacceptable. Being sensitive to another's culture doesn't mean ignoring the (present) rules of my own.

15 Jul 2004 | Fish Sauce said...

I have no idea how I missed his comments, though.

Carry on like I was never here.

15 Jul 2004 | mikis said...

Clear sign that Cloudal was more than inspiration is that BOTH sites fail to render properly in Opera. While this could be excused to someone who blatantly ripped of someone's other work (although I don't see it that way here -- ATM Panic looks like compilation of several popular websites/blogs), I think that Cloudal as "role model" should have done a better work.

Comments on this post are closed

Back to Top ^