Designs

Question 1

Mackie

Answer 1

UKUDR: “configuration” is the relative arrangement.

Question 2

Bailey v Haines

Answer 2

UKUDR: method or principle of construction.

Question 3

Dyson v Qualtex

Answer 3

UKUDR: “must fit”: doesn’t matter if different ways of achieving “must fit”.
“must match” Q. would it make the overall article radically different in appearance? Is a need not preference.
“surface decoration”: does it have a significant function?

Question 4

C & H Engineering

Answer 4

UKUDR: original in the sense of not slavishly copied.

Question 5

Ocular Sciences

Answer 5

UKUDR: common place is “[not] trite, trivial, common-or-garden”
Can trim UKUDR to “most closely” match infringement.

Question 6

Farmers Build

Answer 6

UKUDR: depends on field.

Question 7

Action Storage

Answer 7

UKUDR: often not whole articles that are commonplace, but articles will often include features that are commonplace.

Question 8

DKH Retail

Answer 8

UKUDR: copying

Question 9

LA Gear

Answer 9

UKUDR: knowledge requirement: “knowledge of facts which a reasonable man would arrive at the relevant belief. Facts from which a reasonable man might suspect… cannot be enough.”

Question 10

Trunki

Answer 10

EU Derived: start with purposive construction of the registration.

• Tonal contrast
• Absence of ornamentation

Question 11

Doceram

Answer 11

EU Derived: solely dictated by technical function = high threshold. “Anything other than technical considerations?”

Question 12

Lego

Answer 12

EU Derived: modular products exclusion

Question 13

Acacia v Audi/Porsche

Answer 13

EU Derived: replacement parts must have an identical physical appearance

Question 14

Gebackpresse II

Answer 14

EU Derived: UCDs: German case that says if first disclosure is outside the EU then no rights.

Question 15

P&G

Answer 15

EU Derived: can have physical embodiment of design

Question 16

Dyson v Vax

Answer 16

EU Derived: test is “differs” (despite recital saying “clearly differs”

Question 17

Samsung v Apple

Answer 17

EU Derived: “cool” v “not cool” despite focusing on features as a practical matter, need to consider overall impression.
Lists features of “informed user” - aware of existing design corpus, alert to design issues, reasonably discriminatory.

Question 18

Watches

Answer 18

EU Derived: the greater the design freedom of the designer = less minor differences are sufficient to produce a different overall impression.

Question 19

P&G

Answer 19

EU Derived: design freedom is an objective test, determined by external constraints (e.g health and safety requirements, rules/regulations) but not internal commercial constraints

Question 20

Pepsico

Answer 20

EU Derived: design freedom is affected by cost, available materials, applicable technical, statutory or other standards (CJEU).

Question 21

Dyson v Vax

Answer 21

EU Derived: UK considers economic considerations impact upon the design freedom (although AG disagrees).

Question 22

Green Lane / Easy Sanitary Solutions

Answer 22

EU Derived: design not product

Question 23

Karen Millan

Answer 23

EU Derived: no mosaicking

Question 24

Gautzch Grosshandel

Answer 24

EU Derived: “specialised circles” is broad, reading includes traders as well as designers - could be disclosure to one.

Question 25

Trunki

Answer 25

EU Derived: has to be really obscure not to be a prior design.

Question 26

P&G

Answer 26

EU Derived: pioneering designs get wider scope of protection. Least distance “rule” is indicative but not sufficient.

Question 27

Cantel

Answer 27

EU Derived: “some design features are more equal than others” e.g. banal features, practical/technical significance, low visibility features