I don't trust .info sites anymore, but for some reason rizn's looks more natural and not so forced.... I would have to chose http://www.cartercreative.net/ as the original going off the stylesheet formatting.
...looking more into it I really don't know, archive.org has that layout cached for a long time for rizn, but doesn't have a recent archive of catercreative... I changed my mind to rizn.
I doubt CSS Mania goes through every site they post for signs of plagarism. A site copied from CSS Mania probably will end up in CSS Mania if submitted, for obvious reasons.
yeaa..this's some of plagiarism a studio design, of course too bad for the firm design and still use the template design, I don't know why they keep it until now.. mmmm maybe they don't have an idea to make a brand and a webdesigner just copy paste the source from other site maybe http://www.cartercreative.net/ ripped http://www.rizn.info
It's a bit sad when another firm rips another, but you can see from the portfolio of RIZN that obviously this is their style. A lot of their typography represents their use of thin lines, solids, it's just their style. Looking at Carter Creative's style, their logo doesn't represent the layout at all.
I would say rizn is the original. Simply by going off the PageRank rizn = 5 Carter = 0 I know this isn't the most reliable method, but a PageRank of 0 would indicate a new site