Design infringement

Last updated

Design is a form of intellectual property right concerned with the visual appearance of articles which have commercial or industrial use. [1] [2] The visual form of the product is what is protected rather than the product itself. The visual features protected are the shape, configuration, pattern or ornamentation. A design infringement is where a person infringes a registered design during the period of registration. The definition of a design infringement differs in each jurisdiction but typically encompasses the purported use and make of the design, as well as if the design is imported or sold during registration. To understand if a person has infringed the monopoly of the registered design, the design is assessed under each jurisdiction's provisions. [3] The infringement is of the visual appearance of the manufactured product rather than the function of the product, which is covered under patents. Often infringement decisions are more focused on the similarities between the two designs, rather than the differences.

Contents

Industrial Education Magazine Extract: Mahogany tip-top table from Portland, Maine. Made about 1800. Owned by William Gerrish Esq. of Saco, Maine. Industrial Education Magazine (1910) (14770521791).jpg
Industrial Education Magazine Extract: Mahogany tip-top table from Portland, Maine. Made about 1800. Owned by William Gerrish Esq. of Saco, Maine.

Legislation

Australia

In Australia, a person infringes a registered design if a party manufactures and sells, uses or imports the same or similar design to the registered design without permission of the registered owner. [4] This is held under s71 of the Design Act 2003 (Cth). The following is an extract of s71 of the Designs Act 2003 (Cth), under Infringement of Design.

"(1) A person infringes a registered design if, during the term of registration of the design, and without the licence or authority of the registered owner of the design, the person:

(a) makes or offers to make a product, in relation to which the design is registered, which embodies a design that is identical to, or substantially similar in overall impression to, the registered design; or

(b) imports such a product into Australia for sale, or for use for the purposes of any trade or business’ or

(c) sells, hires or otherwise disposes of, or offers to sell, hire or otherwise dispose of, such a product; or

(d) uses such a product in any way for the purposes of any trade or business; or

(e) keeps such a product for the purpose of doing any of the things mentioned in paragraph (c) or (d)" [5]

The Designs Act recognises two types of infringement: primary and secondary infringement. A primary infringement relates to s71(1)(a), where a person directs, causes or procures the product to be made by a third party. [6] Secondary infringement relate to ss 71(1)(b), (c), (d), (e), where a person infringes a registered design if there is no licence or authority given. [7] A parallel import of a registered design is allowed in Australia. [8]

The Designs Act 2003 replaced the Designs Act 1906, having a particular change to the way design infringements are identified. Key changes included removing tests of obvious and fraudulent imitations. Also introduced was that a certificate of examination must be issued prior to infringement proceedings. The test for infringement is significantly broader as it expressly requires an assessment of the similarities and differences between the registered design and the purported infringing design. [9]

United Kingdom

Under the Registered Designs Act 1949, a design right is infringed when a person without consent from the registered design holder makes, offers, import or exports the product. [10] The infringement rights in registered designs is laid out within Section 7A of the Registered Designs Act 1949. An infringement of the right in a registered design is actionable by the registered proprietor. The Act advises that the right in a registered design is not infringed if, the act is done in private and not commercial in nature, is experimental, or a reproduction for teaching purposes. [10] The UK Court of Appeal confirmed that in determining an infringing article, the registered design, the alleged infringing object, and the prior art must be evaluated. Simply the test is a visual comparison between the two designs. [11] The Act also provides an exemption for innocent infringers. Damages are not awarded against a defendant if there is sufficient evidence to prove that he/she was not aware that the design was registered.

An alternative protection that the United Kingdom legislation offers is the principle of an unregistered design. To prosecute for an infringement, the unregistered design right holder must prove that they created the design in the first place and that the infringing article is a deliberate duplication. [12] Further it must be proved that the shape and overall configuration of the protected product is not the same as any products that have been publicised before the design was created. [13]

United States

In the United States, designs are governed by the patent statute, set out in 35 USC § 171 Chapter 16. Here, protection is given for a new, original and ornamental design of an article. [14] As with other jurisdictions, the design patent within the US only provides protection for the visual design aspects of the article, rather than the function. Chapter 28 of 35 USC § 171 covers the infringement of patents, and defines and infringement as without authority, makes, uses, offers, or sells a patented design. [15] An infringement also covers any attempt in infringing a design, and selling components of patented articles.

Section 127 outlines both direct and indirect infringement. Direct infringement encompasses the unauthorised importation of patented products (35 U.S.C. § 271(a)), and unauthorised importation of products of a patented process (35 U.S.C. § 271(a)). [16] Indirect infringement imposes liability upon those why gave aided another in direct infringement of a registered design (35 U.S.C. § 271(b)) or contributed to infringement (35 U.S.C. § 271(c)). This highlights the most common type of infringement, where the infringer's knowledge of the actions taken are established to confirm if there is an infringement. Proof of intent is also necessary to show the contribution to infringement. The statute does not provide protection for unregistered designs. To gain protection from infringement, and any design patent right, it is necessary to file a patent application.

Testing infringement

Infringement of a registered design can be identified through ‘the eyes of an ordinary observer’ test. This means that the appearance of an accused design is seen to be an infringement, if the design is significantly similar, and one may purchase the accused design product thinking that it is the patented design. [17] This test is based on an ordinary observer being familiar with a product and being able to distinguish between the registered design and prior art designs. The case of Egyptian Goddess Inc. v Swisa Inc. was key in adopting the ordinary observer test. The Court found that for a design to be infringed, the accused design must have appropriated the registered design. [18] The infringement lies within the similarity between the designs what is distinguished from the prior art base. In assessing the overall similarity of designs, for example, s19 of the Designs Act 2003 (Cth) provides a list of factors to consider in testing infringement. This includes understanding the differences between designs rather than emphasising the similarities. More weight must be given to the similarities between two designs. If one aspect of a design is substantially similar, weight must be given to the importance of that aspect of the design.

The decision maker must further take the point of view from the standard of a person who is familiar with the products, the informed user. [19] The ‘informed user’ test can also be used to identify an infringement of a registered or unregistered design. An informed user can range from a consumer to a sectoral expert with technical proficiency. [20] [21] The user will be able to notice small difference between design and can be seen as particularly observant having had a personal experience with, or key knowledge of the product. [20] The informed user should not always be an expert of consumer to be the test in all cases. The selected informed user must be a person who has significant familiarity with the product's appearance, use and nature. [21]

Audiences

Within design and patent law, experts are seen to be the primary decision makers in assessing the similarities and differences of designs. As infringement is judged from different audiences of the design, e.g., consumers and experts, the motivations for infringement are distinguished. Consumers note accused designs to be substitutes where they function in similar ways. To consumers the designs would be interchangeable.

The test for infringement of a design patent draws much more from trademark than from patent law. As the test evokes an audience of reasonable purchasers of the design or product, similar to that of the trademark test. As mentioned, infringement is judged “in the eye of an ordinary observer”. From this, the audience for the test of infringement is an ordinary observer who is placed in the position to determine the similarities of the designs. [22]

Enforcement

To commence enforcement proceedings it must be decided if the Court will establish that the product is infringing the registered design, and if the design is a valid registration. The registered design owner can only consider enforcement proceedings once a certificate of examination has been provided. [23] To enforce design rights against an infringing designer the owner of the registered design must initiate the process of examination. This is in line with the certificate of examination. A design Registrar will not grant a certificate of examination of the design is found to be invalid as there is no newness or distinctiveness to the design. The examination will consist of a comparison of the designs that existed prior to the lodgement of the design application. The test of the ordinary observer enables registered designs with significant similarities to have a broader scope of enforcement. [24] Among many jurisdictions is common for a party threatened with infringement to be allowed to seek relief even through the design has not yet been certified. [25] Action may be taken to protect the goodwill and reputation of the design holder.

Courts

Courts are an essential aspect in the enforcement of design infringement. Court appointed experts are beneficial to enforcement proceedings, as a panel of assessors such as patent attorneys, designers and engineers enhance the limited technical knowledge a judge may have in a certain area. [26] The Courts will assess damages based on the loss of profit and reputation of the design holder, and the profits made by the infringer. [27] Case management is supported by the Court to enable the most economic and efficient method to bring the infringement proceedings to trial.

Alternative dispute resolution

Alternative dispute resolution can be a more effective way of resolving design infringement, as enforcement mechanisms are often not suited to the common disputes that arise. [26] Design disputes can involve complex technical and commercial issues that can be better determined by an expert within alternative dispute resolution rather than employing witnesses within the courts. Arbitration and mediation are suitable for resolving intellectual property disputes, as most common disputes involve small claims for damages. For intellectual property disputes, alternative dispute resolution provides benefits including confidentiality, greater control over the process and a more neutral outcome. [28] Alternative dispute resolution is more cost effective than litigation, therefore more attractive to smaller companies and individuals without the resources, time and funding to resolve cases in court.

Dispute Resolution: Negotiation, Mediation and Other Processes Alternative-dispute-resolution-copy.jpg
Dispute Resolution: Negotiation, Mediation and Other Processes

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trade dress</span> Characteristics of visual appearance of a product

Trade dress is the characteristics of the visual appearance of a product or its packaging that signify the source of the product to consumers. Trade dress is an aspect of trademark law, which is a form of intellectual property protection law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States trademark law</span>

A trademark is a word, phrase, or logo that identifies the source of goods or services. Trademark law protects a business' commercial identity or brand by discouraging other businesses from adopting a name or logo that is "confusingly similar" to an existing trademark. The goal is to allow consumers to easily identify the producers of goods and services and avoid confusion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Industrial design right</span> Intellectual property rights

An industrial design right is an intellectual property right that protects the visual design of objects that are purely utilitarian. An industrial design consists of the creation of a shape, configuration or composition of pattern or color, or combination of pattern and color in three-dimensional form containing aesthetic value. An industrial design can be a two- or three-dimensional pattern used to produce a product, industrial commodity or handicraft.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Patent infringement</span> Breach of the rights conferred by a patent

Patent infringement is the commission of a prohibited act with respect to a patented invention without permission from the patent holder. Permission may typically be granted in the form of a license. The definition of patent infringement may vary by jurisdiction, but it typically includes using or selling the patented invention. In many countries, a use is required to be commercial to constitute patent infringement.

A patent attorney is an attorney who has the specialized qualifications necessary for representing clients in obtaining patents and acting in all matters and procedures relating to patent law and practice, such as filing patent applications and oppositions to granted patents.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United Kingdom trade mark law</span> United Kingdom legislation

United Kingdom trade mark law provides protection for the use of trade marks in the UK. A trade mark is a way for one party to distinguish themselves from another. In the business world, a trade mark provides a product or organisation with an identity which cannot be imitated by its competitors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Design patent</span> US Patent Law

In the United States, a design patent is a form of legal protection granted to the ornamental design of an article of manufacture. Design patents are a type of industrial design right. Ornamental designs of jewelry, furniture, beverage containers and computer icons are examples of objects that are covered by design patents.

The United States is considered to have the most favorable legal regime for inventors and patent owners in the world. Under United States law, a patent is a right granted to the inventor of a (1) process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter, (2) that is new, useful, and non-obvious. A patent is the right to exclude others, for a limited time from profiting from a patented technology without the consent of the patent holder. Specifically, it is the right to exclude others from: making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing, inducing others to infringe, applying for an FDA approval, and/or offering a product specially adapted for practice of the patent.

Japanese patent law is based on the first-to-file principle and is mainly given force by the Patent Act of Japan. Article 2 defines an invention as "the highly advanced creation of technical ideas utilizing the law of nature".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988</span> United Kingdom law

The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, also known as the CDPA, is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that received royal assent on 15 November 1988. It reformulates almost completely the statutory basis of copyright law in the United Kingdom, which had, until then, been governed by the Copyright Act 1956 (c. 74). It also creates an unregistered design right, and contains a number of modifications to the law of the United Kingdom on Registered Designs and patents.

Industrial design rights in the European Union are provided at both the Union level by virtue of the Community design and at the national level under individual national laws.

Copyright in architecture is an important, but little understood subject in the architectural discipline. Copyright is a legal concept that gives the creator of a work the exclusive right to use that work for a limited time. These rights can be an important mechanism through which architects can protect their designs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trademark</span> Trade identifier of products or services

A trademark is a type of intellectual property consisting of a recognizable sign, design, or expression that identifies a product or service from a particular source and distinguishes it from others. A trademark owner can be an individual, business organization, or any legal entity. A trademark may be located on a package, a label, a voucher, or on the product itself. Trademarks used to identify services are sometimes called service marks.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Integrated circuit layout design protection</span> IP protections for computer hardware

Layout designs (topographies) of integrated circuits are a field in the protection of intellectual property.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Semiconductor Chip Protection Act of 1984</span> United States intellectual property law

The Semiconductor Chip Protection Act of 1984 is an act of the US Congress that makes the layouts of integrated circuits legally protected upon registration, and hence illegal to copy without permission. It is an integrated circuit layout design protection law.

The Commonwealth of Australia's Designs Act 2003 replaced the Designs Act 1906. The legislation assists in the protection of the overall appearance of a product resulting from one or more visual features of the product. Although there are some overlaps, the Designs Act is not applicable when defending the functional innovations of a product. In common law, Firmagroup Australia Pty Ltd v Byrne & Davidson Doors (1987) 180 CLR 483, supports this. Firmagroup Australia Pty registered a design for a ‘combination handle and lock for shutter doors’. The innovative product was copied by Byrne & Davidson, and Firmagroup sued for infringement on design. The High Court held that the ‘combination handle and lock for shutter doors’ was ‘an idea of shape or configuration’, which is ‘conveyed by those features’, was ‘too general to attract statutory protection’. The Court then restricted the monopoly to the specific, individual appearance. Further, it added that ‘No design should be so construed as to give to its proprietor a monopoly in a method or principle of construction.’ The defendant proved to distinguish his product adequately, and thus did not infringe on Firmagroup’s design.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trademark infringement</span> Violation of trademark rights

Trademark infringement is a violation of the exclusive rights attached to a trademark without the authorization of the trademark owner or any licensees. Infringement may occur when one party, the "infringer", uses a trademark which is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark owned by another party, especially in relation to products or services which are identical or similar to the products or services which the registration covers. An owner of a trademark may commence civil legal proceedings against a party which infringes its registered trademark. In the United States, the Trademark Counterfeiting Act of 1984 criminalized the intentional trade in counterfeit goods and services.

Patent law in modern mainland China began with the promulgation of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China, in 1984. This law was modeled after patent systems of other civil law countries, particularly Germany and Japan.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Unregistered trademark</span>

An unregistered trademark or common law trademark is an enforceable mark created by a business or individual to signify or distinguish a product or service. It is legally different from a registered trademark granted by statute.

Registration of intellectual property in Ghana is key to safeguarding one's intellectual efforts from infringement. Intellectual property law of Ghana encompasses intellectual property (IP) laws in Ghana, such as laws governing copyright, patent, trademark, industrial design rights, and unfair competition. The main intellectual property laws in Ghana include the Copyright Act, 2005, the Patents Act, 2003, the Trademarks Act, 2004, the Industrial Designs Act, 2003 and the Protection Against Unfair Competition Act, 2000. These are supplemented by regulations passed by the Legislature to augment the rate of development under IP laws.

References

  1. Fitzgerald, Anne (2015). Introduction to Intellectual Property. Thomson Reuters. p. 83. ISBN   9780455233710.
  2. "Designs examination, infringement and enforcement". Phillips, Ormonde, Fitzpatrick Intellectual Property.
  3. Stephens Lawyers & Consultants. "Changes to Australian Designs Law" (PDF). Stephens Lawyers & Consultants.
  4. "Designs Act 2003".
  5. "Designs Act 2003".
  6. Fitzgerald, Anne (2015). Introduction to Intellectual Property. Thomson Reuters. p. 93. ISBN   9780455233710.
  7. "Designs Act 2003".
  8. FPA Patent Attorneys. "Enforceability and infringement". FPA Patent Attorneys.
  9. Condon, Wayne (2004). "New design laws: after nearly a century, Australia updates its registered design laws". Law Society Journal. 46 (2).
  10. 1 2 "Registered Designs Act 1949".
  11. "How to assess registered design infringement". Barker Brettell Intellectual Property.
  12. "What's the difference between unregistered design right and design registration?". Business and IP Centre.
  13. "Unregistered design right protection in the UK: a genuine asset". Barker Brettell Intellectual Property.
  14. "Protecting and enforcing design rights: United States". World Trademark Review.
  15. "United States Code Title 35 - Patents" (PDF).
  16. Petersen, Troy. "U.S. Infringement Liability for Foreign Sellers of Infringing Products". Duke Law & Technology Review. 2: 1–8.
  17. Oake, Robert (2011). "Design Patent Perspective: The Ordinary Observer Test" (PDF). Intellectual Property Today.
  18. "Egyptian Goddess Inc. v. Swisa Inc. 543 F. 3D 665 (Fed. Cir. 2008)". BitLaw.
  19. Mccutcheon, Jani. "Designs, Parody and Artistic Expression — A Comparative Perspective of Plesner v Louis Vuitton" (PDF). Monash University Law Review. 41.
  20. 1 2 "Case Law: European Court clarifies 'informed user' test necessary to register a product design". ICAEW.
  21. 1 2 "The Relevant Standard of the 'Informed User'". Madderns.
  22. Fromer, Jeanne. "The Audience in Intellectual Property Infringement". Michigan Law Review. 112.
  23. "Protecting your designs". Arts Law Centre Australia.
  24. "Designs infringement decision fans enthusiasm for owners of registered designs in Australia". Dave Collison Cave Intellectual Property. 20 September 2016.
  25. "Design Infringement and Enforcement". WWIPPS.
  26. 1 2 "ALRC 74 Designs" (PDF). Australian Law Reform Commission.
  27. "Outcome from court action". Australian Government IP Australia. 10 March 2016.
  28. Yeend, Nancy (1996). "ADR and Intellectual Property: A Prudent Option" (PDF). The Journal of Law and Technology.