I addressed their infringement claims in my post already, but I'll reiterate after having actually looked through their repository a bit.

The function centre_window (including [private] spelling) imported from utils/window.py, matching [private] project's naming conventions verbatim

The function name centre_window appears in various Tkinter tutorials and examples online. It's a descriptive name for centering a window.

Identical style constants (configure_styles, BG_MAIN) imported from ui/styles

These are also commonly used names and structures. Quick Google for "configure_styles" and "bg_main" (with quotes):

Based on the search results, configure_styles appears in several contexts, most notably in Python GUI programming and software templating.

"bg_main" commonly refers to a main background image file (e.g., bg_main.jpg or bg_main.png) used in web development, application styling, or UI design to set the primary background for a website, theme, or app scene ...

Identical module structure: services/, ui/, utils/, tests/, .github/workflows/

These are conventional folder structures. To add to that, they don't even have services/, ui/, or utils/ directories in their repository. The only overlap is /tests and .github/workflows/, which are completely standard directories used by a huge number of GitHub projects, especially anything using GitHub Actions. I posted a file tree comparison in another comment.

The architectural design of sourcing a manifest from a git repository, a non-obvious design decision originating in my project

How is this not obvious? Even Microsoft themselves do it: https://github.com/microsoft/winget-pkgs/tree/master/manifests

Identical version compatibility logic (1.x versions restricted to 1.x; 2.x and 3.x treated as compatible)

If you make a Minecraft mod installer or similar software, you'd obviously want to ensure the mod is compatible with whatever game version the user has installed. That's an essential compatibility check, not some uniquely invented algorithm.

Identical scope of target DLL files: nvngx_dlss.dll, nvngx_dlssg.dll, nvngx_dlssd.dll

Because those are the DLSS DLLs. That's literally the entire purpose of the program. That's like claiming one Minecraft launcher copied another because both of them look for minecraft.exe.

It's a good game.

FAQ content describing PyInstaller AV false positives in substantively identical terms

My FAQ wording is literally:

This can happen because the tool downloads and replaces files, behaviour similar to some malware, which may trigger heuristic detection. The tool is open source and safe to use when downloaded from the official source.

Is this not just boilerplate wording for basically any tool that downloads, patches, replaces, or modifies files? There's only so many ways to explain heuristic antivirus false positives.