Yes, I'm thinking of the moral question rather than the legal one. Other commenters seem upset that Dr. Lui didn't get his credit, but it seems to me the next level of credit is equally interesting.
(I'm getting off topic, but the fact that the art of photography almost always involves copying a real world object always spins my mind in circles. How much of the credit for a great photo of the Eiffel Tower goes to the photographer, and how much is due to Eiffel? How about a photograph of the statue of David? How about a photograph of the Mona Lisa? How about a photograph of a photograph?)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbell%27s_Soup_Cans
Down that line of thinking, I always found this example interesting. It's one of Andy warhols most well known paintings, and it's literally just of Campbell's soup cans. I've always wondered how the original designer of those cans felt, that a painter just painted his design and became famous.
(I'm getting off topic, but the fact that the art of photography almost always involves copying a real world object always spins my mind in circles. How much of the credit for a great photo of the Eiffel Tower goes to the photographer, and how much is due to Eiffel? How about a photograph of the statue of David? How about a photograph of the Mona Lisa? How about a photograph of a photograph?)