So there appears to be a pretty fierce debate that bubbles up from time-to-time about ICs and GBs that offer similar color ways to those seen in the past. Can a designer “own” a set of colors in a manner similar to copyright?
From a legal standpoint, the answer is pretty clearly no. And when it comes to actual copyright and IP enforcement, designers sometimes find themselves skirting just outside the lines of infringement.
But it’s certainly understandable that communities like Geekhack, r/mm, r/mk, etc. might not want to support copycats, particularly considering the amount of ancillary work involved in running an IC or GB for an uncommon color scheme. Moreover, running same or similar colorways repeatedly can potentially discourage creativity.
The trouble is this: nobody can own colors. As such, there are no external rules to lean on to back up an assertion of copying. So instead, that enforcement takes the shape of badmouthing by people seen as Keyboard design & community leaders. It’s a very clique-ish approach. It’s not transparent, and it doesn’t scale.
Note: I don’t mean to be down on those designers for wanting to protect their work. I just hope they, and everyone, can see that a formal system of rules would be preferable to relying on what is currently in place.
This community keeps getting bigger. If avoiding copycats is of value to the community, then there ought to be some clear, easily accessible written rules. These rules would then need some sort of quasi-democratic body to oversee them and maintain them. Hypothetically, this could all be done in cooperation with other major keeb communities.
Because we need some clear rules on what *counts* as copying. If two sets share one color but not others, is that a copy? Is a dyesub set that uses completely custom legends a copy if its colors happen to be similar to an earlier GMK set? Are GMK and SP standard colors always fair game so long as you’re not using the same exact combination? What about the RAL K7, whose colors were explicitly chosen to support color standardization in plastics?
Are colorschemes lifted from existing vintage keyboards (Dolch, Olivetti, Triumph Adler) fair game, since the IC/GB-runner didn’t design them?
If a person throws together a color scheme in a half-assed render or KLE chart, but doesn’t show other signs of preparation, do they hold rights to those colors? Maybe just temporary rights, giving them a chance to follow through on improvements?
What about running something like a standalone GB for an Assembly, Ergo, or language kit that the colorway designer didn’t think was worth the effort?
And for how long do these rights last? Are they renewed every time the colorway is rerun?
I understand the desire to hold IC/GB runners to a different standard than what is supplied by copyright and/or trademark laws, since IP law is insufficient to prevent knockoffs and copycats. But what exactly is that standard? And who has the authority to make that judgement? And could it be appealed?
It just doesn’t seem fair to anyone involved if the anti-copying rule remains unwritten, unclear, and enforced via clout. It would be far better to have a clear set of rules that vendors, designers, and forums can argue over, modify, and uphold.