Designs are forgotten and misunderstood rights which is a shame because they straddle the issues facing all of the different IP rights. It's hard to truly understand designs without also understanding trade mark, patent and copyright law first. This post is a whistle stop tour of some recent design decisions you may have missed and the first in a regular series of six monthly posts on this topic which I will share as a guest contributor. UK Court decisions Unregistered design

UK unregistered design right (UK UDR) is a handy IP right which is often overlooked by rightsholders.  It protects the shape or configuration of the whole or part of a product for ten years from the date the design was first (or 15 years from the date it was first recorded in a design document if that period is shorter).  UK UDR does not protect surface decoration (unlike Community  unregistered design right and registered designs).  Since the recent procedural reforms in t

Just under four years ago the UK Intellectual Property Office commissioned research to address the lack of existing data on design infringement. The results of that research were published last week. My key takeaway is that the designs community does not appreciate the value of designs - particularly unregistered designs. This post aims to change that. Unregistered vs unregistered designs In the report, unregistered designs were rated at the bottom of the list of useful right

Four years is a long time in politics but not a particularly long time in the land of government reports. Just under four years ago the UK Intellectual Property Office commissioned research to address the lack of existing data on design infringement. The results of that research were recently published. Designs are an important part of the UK economy. In 2015, the UK design economy was worth 6% of the nation’s total economy. It was therefore considered a worthwhile exercise t

Although it is a case management decision, there are so many hints in the recent decision Spin Master v PMS [2017] EWHC 1477 (Pat) that Mr Justice Carr wants the judgment to get wider circulation.  As he puts it, the CMC raised the issue of "how to achieve short, cost-effective hearings where one or perhaps both parties are preparing for a much longer trial." Background to the dispute This dispute concerns alleged infringement of a Community registered design (002614669-0002)