Well, just to give that expired equine one more kick: to say that GO just set out to copy the Lange 1 seems a bit uncharitable: after all, the small time layout wasn't new - classic complications by Breguet and others had already been there. Also, the asymmetry with that sweeping power reserve and all, was a feature of Lange's stablemate JLC, on the Master Control Geographic and Reserve de Marche that had been around a few years by then. Even though the Lange 1 was pre-Richemont, Lange and JLC were both owned by Mannesman then and no doubt sharing resources themselves. So one could even say that if GO copied the Lange 1 from their neighhours, Lange might equally be said to have copied the MC RDM from their sister company, at least in part.
If we accept that GO and Lange already had equal claim on the idea of a substantial watch with a big date window (they'd been making them together at GUB for fifty years), then it's only really the asymmetry and sweeping power reserve we're talking about - defining characteristics of JLC perhaps? But just as the Lange 1 is nothing like a JLC, I feel personally that the GO Pano is sufficiently different from the Lange 1 in feel and personality to warrant consideration on its own merits. And that some elements they share, are a history that belongs to both.
Anyway, I appreciate that there's no definitive answer here until Herr Glashuette logs in to say "no, actually I just lifted the whole damn thing - until I saw the Lange 1, I was thinking of going digital...". Or otherwise. Maybe GO did go too obvious in making an asymmetric dial soon after the Lange 1. But given how much else they already shared, I think it's still probably OK to like it. Or not. Those JLCs are sweet, too :)
We will have to agree to agree.