If you haven’t heard of the Jio-Zoom plagiarism clash, you’re probably living under a rock (which may not be a bad idea given the state of the world right now). The turf war between Jio Meet and Zoom began when the Indian telecom giant ripped off the Chinese company’s design pixel by pixel. What followed was users all over the country bashing Jio for publicly admitting to plagiarism. I guess Zara stealing designs from the runway is too menial for us to be outraged at, but user interface design is where everyone draws the line.

如果您还没有听说过Jio-Zoom gi窃冲突，那么您可能生活在一块岩石下(考虑到当前的世界状况，这可能不是一个坏主意)。 印度电信巨J Jio Meet和Zoom之间的争夺战始于这家印度电信公司逐像素撕下这家中国公司的设计。 随之而来的是全国各地的用户抨击Jio公开承认抄袭。 我想Zara从跑道上窃取设计对我们来说实在是太小气了，不值得我们为之愤怒，但是用户界面设计才是每个人划清界限的地方。

As a designer, I am naturally drawn to hating Jio for taking someone’s hard work and passing it off as their own with no remorse. Responsible netizens, such as I, threw enough shade on Jio to last a lifetime, but when you’re owned by the 4th richest man in the world, it’s all background noise. This got me thinking — when you’re that wealthy, hiring a team of designers that knows how to make a design look original, even though, it’s a direct copy should be the easiest thing to do. Why then, did the company think it was wise to rip off even the smallest details such as hex codes and icon dimensions? There’s more to this than meets the eye and that’s the discussion we should be having.

作为一名设计师，我自然会讨厌Jio，因为他要承担某人的辛勤工作并将其作为自己的工作转嫁给自己，而不会re悔。 负责任的网民(例如I)对Jio施加了足够的阴影，使其无法维持一生，但是当您被世界第四大首富所拥有时，全都是背景噪音。 这让我开始思考-当您如此有钱时，雇用一支知道如何使设计看起来新颖的设计师团队，即使是直接复制也应该是最简单的事情。 为什么然后，公司认为剔除最小的细节(例如十六进制代码和图标尺寸)是明智的？ 这不仅是吸引眼球，而且这是我们应该进行的讨论。

Besides the integrity argument, Jio haters had nothing more to say about the issue. The supporters, on the other hand, claim that Jio offers features that Zoom doesn’t and that’s why it is better. But let’s be real for a second — how many apps on your phone can you say are TRULY unique? As much as I hate to admit it, user experience plagiarism simply does not matter to the user. In many ways, it might be welcome because it requires lesser cognitive effort on the users’ part. So why do designers slog all day to come up with fresh ideas, when it’s easier to just rip someone off? Simple — some of us have a conscience.

除了正直论外，Jio仇恨者对此事无话可说。 另一方面，支持者声称Jio提供了Zoom所没有的功能，这就是为什么它更好的原因。 但是，让我们成为现实吧-您可以说您的手机上有多少个应用程序真正独一无二？ 尽管我不愿承认，但用户体验抄袭对用户而言并不重要。 在许多方面，它可能是受欢迎的，因为它需要用户较少的认知工作。 那么，当将某人抢走更容易时，为什么设计师会整天想出新主意呢？ 很简单-我们中有些人有良心。

At present, there is little redressal for issues pertaining to UI design plagiarism and surprisingly, this has been hotly debated. There is a surge of “aesthetic” culture with companies like Instagram and Snapchat putting graphic design tools in the hands of every customer. Anyone with a smartphone can make a conventionally good looking graphic and pass it off as their creative work. It is widely known that programs like Sketch provide readymade UI templates that just require the designer to update the text and publish the app for development. Would you classify such designs as original? And is there really a way to identify how much of the UX has been mimicked?

目前，与UI设计抄袭有关的问题很少得到补救，令人惊讶的是，这已经引起了激烈的争论。 随着Instagram和Snapchat等公司将图形设计工具交到每位客户的手中，“审美”文化激增。 拥有智能手机的任何人都可以制作出通常看起来不错的图形，并将其作为创意工作进行传播。 众所周知，诸如Sketch之类的程序提供了现成的UI模板，这些模板仅需要设计者更新文本并发布应用程序进行开发。 您会将这类设计归类为原始设计吗？ 真的有办法确定模仿了多少UX吗？

User experience, today, has matured to levels where the process is largely standardized. If you wish to design a customer feedback form, you don’t have to reinvent the wheel — you have a body of past work by other firms that has proven results. Thus, companies rely on visual elements such as colours, icons and layouts to differentiate themselves. And this where Jio faltered. But had they simply changed the colours of the buttons and moved the graphics around a little, would their design magically become original? Would you even KNOW whether it has been copied?

今天，用户体验已经成熟到可以在很大程度上标准化流程的水平。 如果您希望设计一个客户反馈表，则不必重新发明轮子-您拥有其他公司过去的工作成果，这些工作已经证明是行之有效的。 因此，公司依靠视觉元素(例如颜色，图标和布局)来与众不同。 这让Jio步履蹒跚。 但是他们是否只是简单地改变了按钮的颜色并稍微移动了图形，他们的设计会神奇地变成原始的吗？ 您甚至不知道它是否已被复制？

So, before you jump to Zoom’s defense, ask yourself — Do you like it when you’re in a familiar digital environment and know what button to click on? Would you rather use an app that you’ve interacted with before or learn how to use an entirely new solution? If you’re a regular user that fits the average persona, I’m guessing you would pick familiarity over novelty. And that’s what Jio took advantage of. Does that mean every Zoom user in India will move to JioMeet? Not really, but it helps push the latter’s agenda. By creating a familiar environment and offering better features such as 24-hour calls that Zoom did not provide, JioMeet has proven that, in 2020, ethics can go take a hike.

因此，在您开始使用Zoom进行防御之前，请问自己-在熟悉的数字环境中，您喜欢它吗？您知道该单击哪个按钮吗？ 您是愿意使用以前与之互动过的应用程序，还是要学习如何使用全新的解决方案？ 如果您是适合一般角色的普通用户，那么我想您会比新事物更熟悉。 这就是Jio所利用的。 这是否意味着印度的每个Zoom用户都将迁移到JioMeet？ 并非如此，但这有助于推动后者的议程。 通过创建一个熟悉的环境并提供更好的功能(例如Zoom并未提供的24小时通话)，JioMeet已证明，在2020年，道德可以得到提高。

In grey areas like these, I like to believe that the user always emerges the winner. When two designs LOOK quite the same, the competition comes down to better product design and a glitch-free experience. The solution with better features triggers competitors to offer similar elements and at the end of day, the user wins. So while the world fights over what’s ethical and what’s not, I’ll be busy uploading a story on Instagram. Or maybe, Snapchat. Or Facebook. Doesn’t matter — they’re all the same anyway.

在这样的灰色地带，我想相信用户总是会成为赢家。 当两种设计看起来完全相同时，竞争就归结为更好的产品设计和无故障的体验。 具有更好功能的解决方案促使竞争对手提供类似的要素，最终，用户获胜。 因此，尽管世界在为道德与非道德作斗争，但我将忙于在Instagram上传故事。 也许是Snapchat。 或Facebook。 没关系-无论如何它们都是一样的。

Liked what you read? Head to www.trystwithdesign.com for more.

喜欢您阅读的内容吗？ 请访问www.trystwithdesign.com了解更多信息。