nope. Fender is a whole thing, sadly didna protect the copyright to the design properly.
I am not really interested in taking sides here, as there is too much information that occurred behind the scenes in the Darkglass / 3Leaf relationship for anyone to really be justified in proclaiming that one party or the other was in the right or wrong, but I reject the base premise of your argument.
Saying that the Fender clones are somehow an entirely different scenario because they failed to properly copyright the design is granting moral superiority to the Sadowskys and Laklands of the world for profiting off of Fender's design based on a legal blunder. So it is ok for people to rip off someone else's design as long as they aren't breaking patent law? I mean technically yes, it is, but this whole argument against Spencer's designs are morally based anyways. I mean, all the companies making fender clones are (at the minimum implicitly) claiming that their basses are better than Fender's, and they all claim to capture that classic "P" or "J" tone. So sure, Spencer's new pedals look like Darkglass's but he is definitely not claiming that they sound the same!!!
Also, if Doug had neglected to "copyright his design properly", I guarantee that none of Spencer's detractors would be any less upset.
Lets call it what it is, Spencer made an overdrive and preamp that may or may not share some similarities with the Darkglass design in terms of general circuit architecture, but there are only so many ways to develop an overdriven signal! Sure maybe the aesthetics could have been different (and if they were, this discussion probably wouldn't be happening), but I can get that he was attached to the look and wanted to keep it going. Darkglass was quick to change the enclosures and aesthetics of their pedals after the split with 3Leaf, so obviously they have moved on from that look.