Copying, stealing, or inspiration when it comes to UX Design
As a novice designer, I used to create horrendous, clunky, and downright ugly digital content. When I was first getting into UX and Product Design, I would spend hours scrolling through websites like Dribbble and Behance that showcased stunning designs that appeared too good to be true. My eyes would become fixated on the pixel perfect elements and marvelous gradient colors; my brain was stumped as to how someone could create something so creative and visually magnificent on their own. A quick Google search of “how to get better at UX design” led me to a simple solution: just copy people.
My entire academic career had been bombarded with threats of expulsion upon plagiarism and shame for not being able to come up with your own ideas, yet here were well established designers with tens of thousands of followers telling me that it was okay — and encouraged — to copy other designer’s ideas on the internet and use it as a way to advance myself. This led me to contemplate what the difference between copying, stealing, or gaining inspiration was. Surely there was overlap between the three; however, I struggled to find a clear answer to where the distinction between each action was.
Surely taking someone’s entire design project and passing it as yours is a clear sign of plagiarism, but what about taking small snippets or general design ideas? What if I just wanted to include someone else’s design for a small pop up and use it with an entire website I created? With a plethora of design content and information on the internet, we live in a world where there isn’t always a clear owner for different design principles or ideas.
There is a thin line between copying someone’s UX/UI designs and gaining inspiration to make your product better; however, it comes down to what is being copied, why it is being copied, and who is claiming to own it. Copying other’s design work with good intentions and meaningful execution can lead to better user experiences, continuous creativity, and innovative products.
Most websites and apps look the same anyways
When it comes to designing general layouts and elements for digital products, copying other designers can help make user experiences enhanced because users will be familiar with how sites work. According to Jakob’s Law of the Internet User Experience:
“Users spend most of their time on other sites. This means that users prefer your site to work the same way as all the other sites they already know.”
Jakob Nielsen, “Guru of Web Usability” and Cofounder of Nielsen Norman Group
This notion makes sense. As internet users, we cultivate our own mental models on how websites work and how things will most likely be laid out. For example, when a user wants to exit out of a website or app, the exit button tends to be an X or red circle, and it will be positioned in one of the top right or left corners. A designer taking this idea of where and how to close out of different sites would not be wrongful stealing since it is an important standard to design what users are used to.
On the flip side, if a designer did not want to copy this idea and instead came up with something like a bright blue button in the bottom left to close pages solely for the sake of being creative, this would hinder the user experience. In this circumstance, since the design being copied is a common user action (closing out of something) and the design is being copied in order to help users effectively complete this task (since they are used to it from other websites), then this would be an instance when it is okay to copy. Copying can help lead to more intuitive products and standardized experiences.
Copying designs is never a complete copy and paste
Copying designers involves modification and continuous creativity which enhances designs. While keeping the notion of Jakob’s Law that sites should look and operate the same to users as other sites do, this notion is only applied to a certain extent. Let’s take a look at personal websites like portfolios for a second.
A portfolio is a website that provides information and showcases example work from an individual or company; the goal is to represent your skills and experiences while highlighting your personality to an extent. With the emergence of web development tools and platforms like SquareSpace, Webflow, and Wix making it easier than ever for people to develop their own websites, there are also a plethora of templates that users can either use for free or purchase.
With using a pre existing template design, there is still some level of flexibility and customization involved. Multiple designers may use the same template but then rework it to their own liking; however, there becomes an ethical issue when various people are using the same templates, some are claiming it as their own, and there are blurred licensing agreements over who owns the actual templates.
As a UX Design student, I am constantly scrolling through other student’s portfolios just to glance at what my peers are doing and see if I can gain any inspiration. One day, I noticed that there were multiple peers who all had the exact same bright orange, modern looking template with their own names and headshots integrated within. At the bottom of each footer was a small note saying “Copyright 2021 © Their/Name. All rights reserved.” How was this possible?
These students did not create the website template or design, yet there was no indication of where they got their design from or if they even got it from someone else at all. Although most of the actual content on the website was their own in terms of case studies and images, there was no homage to whoever created the skeleton of their work. They were claiming copyright for the material itself, but who owns the rights to the actual web development code or design layouts?
Web development websites that do include Terms of Use for various templates. On Webflow specifically, the creator of the template retains ownership of the template but grants users either a Single-Use License or Free License. With these licenses in place, those using the website are able to modify and manipulate the template however they see fit, but the resulting work is still subject to its license. With something legal like this, the line is a little more clear that stealing templates in an attempt to claim as your own or sell to another third party is both morally and legally wrong.
However, what about copying elements of the manipulated template and updating it with your own work? Controversies about copyright and the Internet are not new or novel, and they even transcend into the design community.
Remixing designs leads to innovative and better products
Imitating other designs and then building upon them further not only expands the designer’s skill and knowledge but it also can lead to innovative products. When it comes to sampling others’ work and remixing it to be your own, there can be a legal gray area.
In 2008, documentary filmmaker Brett Gaylor created RiP!: A Remix Manifesto to talk about the changing concept of copyright. The documentary essentially is an open source film that emphasizes the manifesto of “culture always builds on the past.” It encourages that in order to fuel creativity and put out amazing work in the world, we should combine and/or edit existing materials to produce new work.
This derivative nature can be applied to design as people create design libraries and encourage others to use their design elements. Figma, an industry leading design prototype software, has a Figma Community where designers and developers are encouraged to “explore, install, use, and remix thousands of templates, plugins, and widgets.” Figma’s goal is to make design accessible to all and help designers create meaningful products. Users can voluntarily contribute to the community and then other users can download, use, and remix the designs with fair use.
What’s considered “fair use” has been an important question and concept to be understood. In the Digital Rights Movement by Hector Postigo, the idea of fair use is explored and interpreted as a way to legitimize personal noncommercial uses and noncommercial creative uses. What this means is that copyrighted material can be used without permission from the copyright holder for different uses. This strikes up a good balance of still crediting those who might have copyright while allowing people to generate new works and innovation.
Fair use originated, and still operates, as a method to encourage learning from earlier works and better society (Fair Use is Good for Creativity and Innovation). The Copyright Law (a form of intellectual property law, protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works) automatically protects UI/UX design elements. Going a step further, when certain UX designs are developed with actual software, the software-related inventions can become patented.
When it comes to copying and remixing designs with fair use, there are still some steps designers must take. Going back to Figma Community, Figma gives any user who uploads to the community an Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license which is not a public domain license. This means that those posting their designs can expect others to share and adapt the content for any purpose; however, they must sitll give credit to the original creator. A notion like this allows for designers to expand on others, create even better solutions, and still give credit where its due.
Copying in the design community is often encouraged as it can lead to better, more innovative products through iterations. Similar to Github’s “forking” code to use a snippet of it, Dribble lets users link designs together. On Dribbble, there is a Rebound feature that allows you to gain inspiration from others while still crediting them. This encourages users to pick apart other designs and apply it to your own, which takes skill in itself. Copying effectively can lead to innovative ideas that would have just stopped if we were never able to draw inspiration and expand on other’s thoughts.
Copying isn’t always bad
At the end of the day, there will always be designers who steal content and pass it off as their own, but it does no good for them in the long run. Being a designer is about expressing yourself while also seeking to provide meaningful experiences to your users. By copying aspects of other designs, we as UX designers can optimize current experiences and flex our creativity to make products even better.
While there are blurred lines between what is actually stealing or not, it becomes crucial for designers in the community to think about their own consequences and think about what they are copying, why they are copying, and if they are claiming to own it or not. At the end of the day, a little copying could make the world a better place.
