"copied" the work is a more accurate word. Not to say that it isn't bad (it is).

The polish paper copied his design. But, as the designer, he hasn't lost anything (unless he was bidding for a chance to apply the same design to that polish paper and lost the bid to this other person). He didn't lose money, prestige, or anything else through this.

(There's a good reason why look and feel isn't really protected by IP law, except in the realm of trademarks -- because, unless there's some kind of deception, nothing is lost by mimicing the look and feel of something else.)

He's not a victim, because nothing has been taken from him. The person who copied his design gained something, and so did the paper that paid that person, but the original creator lost nothing.

It's very similar, but the design elements are definitely spun in a different direction. For example, the airplane graphic - the design on the tail is the same, but it's a different plane from a different angle with a different backdrop.

This is riffing, not stealing. It's a trend throughout art as long as art has been a thing.

I think you mean "copied", not "stole". Bild am Sonntag can continue to use their layouts.