Three.js plagiarism warning

If you’re starting out with three, you may or may not be interested in using templates. If you go looking for some, there’s something you may want to be aware of.

Unlike for WordPress or Bootstrap, templates for three.js and WebGL are practically nonexistent. I came across this too-good-to-be-true site which has such templates. However, probably all of these have been stolen, 100% sure.

Two of them you might recognize as Tao Tajima’s website and Hajime Watanabe’s website (both featured on the three.js homepage) which were developed by homonculus Inc. and respectively. If you follow the baqemono link, their Awwwards page showcases two more sites which are also on photo-gallery, Archi Site Mobius and Kaz Arahama.

photo-gallery started as flash-gallery back in 2011 based on its Twitter, but introduced photo-gallery in March 2020 based on a Facebook post. It’s apparently located in Paris but during checkout, the language is Romanian. The website is well-designed, the checkout is secure (Stripe), and you receive your template, so it appears legit.

Checked the domain on Google and the registrant is from Bihor, Romania. Looking at photo-gallery’s YouTube channel, it’s probably just one person. The domain was registered in 2018. All templates on the site were shared on social media in 2020. The sites that were plagiarized (tao, hajime, archi, and kaz) were made in 2017, 2017, 2019, and 2016 respectively.

Comparing the files between the real sites and the templates has now confirmed it. Should something be done?

Update: I have contacted homunculus and baqemono about this.

Update: The 3D World Video Gallery on photo-gallery was stolen from Lusion (also featured on the three.js homepage) who made it for opencontinents[dot]com
Guess I’ll tell them too.


Using these templates is as safe as buying a stolen TV. Sure you paid for it, but you’re still using stolen goods, run the risk of getting caught, and encouraging the thieves to continue doing it. Besides, let’s say the real creator is in Amsterdam, and you publish the stolen template for a EU business, you’re at risk for copyright infringement. It won’t be difficult to prove when comparing the code.

Besides legal and moral implications, your reputation could also be at stake. You don’t want to be that developer who’s known for building websites with stolen content for your clients.


Yeah, I’ve been looking into it further since the first post, and its definitely a no.


If they even claim a basically 1:1 copy was made by them it is far worse as you mentioned regarding copyright infringement. There are differences between code parts or algorithms, if their concept were implemented, not straight copied, the legal situation might become hard to prove or not suable without a patent, but a bold effortless copy with the author name being changed is a clear criminal offence.

@sora i would try inform the original authors