I'm actually a bit surprised by the reactions here. Since when is css copyrighted? Where are the numerous lawsuits against Pinterest "clones" for having a grid layout etc.?
Sure, it's a shame, but css, like html and javascript, is not a protected source. It's run client-side. Would you rather just receive a image/png from websites?
EDIT: I know someone who've experienced something very similar (with css prefixes obviously referring to his site rather than the microsoft.cn clone).
Works authored in CSS, HTML and JavaScript are all protected by copyright. Lawsuits for code theft, including in webpages, happen all the time. Ask any web host, they have to take down pages after getting DMCA copyright infringement notices about stolen HTML all the time.
Grid layouts, pinning images, etc. are ideas. Ideas are not protected. The concrete implementations of them are. You can clone Pinterest, but you can't do it by stealing their JavaScript and CSS files. You have to write your own.
Yes, it does. In the US, all copyrightable creative works (which includes CSS files) are copyrighted by default as soon as they are created. The system is opt-out, not opt-in.
Having something open source doesn't remove the copyright, it just permits usage. Likewise in this situation. While you can see the source, it doesn't mean that you can just copy the source and use it yourself as it is copyrighted and the creator can choose to let others use their work as they see fit.
