Defining what is and is not a "clone" is really the big question, and it's understandable why Joshua and the mods wouldn't want to wade into that mire. I've come down on the side of "clone talk is okay, so long as criticism is," but I base that opinion on what I've seen so far of what people have called clones/copycats etc., which are actually not that close. Cases like the Kolink Rocket and ZS-A4 are obviously heavily derived from the A4, but they're also different enough that you would never mistake one for the other. Same with the Cougar QBX, which has a bit of a reputation as "the poor man's M1." These aren't really clones in a strict sense, IMO, and should be perfectly okay to talk about (I've even suggested the QBX to people looking for a cheaper M1 alternative).
Where it does get murkier is when a case is obviously trying to mimic another existing design - both in layout and looks - to the point where you could fairly easily mistake one for the other. While we have yet to see what the finished product looks like, that may well be the case with the Nouvolo Steck. It's obvious macbosco is not just taking inspiration from, but directly copying most of the elements of the Ghost S1, and that's not something you need a background in patent/copyright law to see.
Let me suggest another angle to look at this from, besides the legal one: respect. Is it disrespectful to outright copy someone's else's design without their permission with the intention of profiting from it? I would argue that most people would agree that it is. That being the case, and it falling within the purview of the moderators to censor disrespectful posts, perhaps this is an angle to approach it from that sidesteps any questions of legality, or even morality/ethics.
Just a thought.
