To the person who doesn’t understand the “possession” of things, you clearly are not much of a coder. You misuse the term “open source.” Open source does not mean that you have access to the source code. Open source means that the code must follow the Open Source Definition (OSD) and allow for free distribution and derived works. Just because someone can crack open your source code does not mean they have a right to it.
About the codes thing, one thing is to steal something, another is to be accused of stealing after you’ve been given permission. If the codes used were being used with the permission of the owner, a change of heart on the permission doesn’t equal that the codes are automatically stolen, which is what the anon was saying. If the owner asked for them to be taken down, and the person refused, then yeah, it’s theft.
To the “color by numbers” anon: the difficulty of HTML/CSS/JS is 100%, completely and utterly irrelevant. This is not an issue of trademark, where no one else is allowed to arrange the code how you arranged it. This is an issue ethics and the intellectual property of creators. It doesn’t matter if the code is incredibly easy to do, if you did not do it and took it from someone else, then you have no right to claim credit for it. It’s really that simple.
No, there’s nothing wrong with “repurposing” code. But taking people’s code without consent is not repurposing them. If the owner of the code does not allow the granting of rights, then “repurposing” their code is theft. The actual complexity of the theft is irrelevant. Breaking into someone’s source and taking it is the crime. If a robber breaks into your house and takes nothing of value, he is still guilty of breaking and entering.