Research Handbook on Design Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henning Hartwig
Keyword(s):  
Design Law

scholarly journals Differences in Immaterial Details: Dimensional Conversion and Its Implications for Protecting Digital Designs Under EU Design Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-168
Author(s):  
Mikko Antikainen
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
3D Design ◽  
Gaming Industry ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
More Care ◽  
Design Law ◽  
Physical Shape ◽  
Limitations And Exceptions ◽  
Scope Of Protection ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThe paper considers three main questions: the legal status of digital designs from the perspective of EU design law, whether the protection is tied to the reproduction of physical products, and whether the scope of protection covers dimensional conversion such as using a 3D design in 2D form or vice versa. There are two sets of views regarding dimensional conversion: the “abstract” and the “concrete” view. These two different attitudes towards the scope of protection influence the manner in which the protectability of digital designs is assessed. In the “abstract” protection, it would not matter whether a product only exists as a digital image and not as a physical shape. In the “concrete” view, the protection of digital designs is more problematic, as the scope of protection is often tied to the reproduction of an actual physical product. The paper argues that, under CJEU jurisprudence and EUIPO practice, most of the open questions regarding the protection of digital designs and dimensional conversion can be considered as solved. The CJEU has chosen “abstract” protection over “concrete”, thus broadening the scope of protection at the EU level. This means that the digital use of non-digital designs can now be seen as infringing. As a consequence, in the future, right holders should put more care into evaluating the limitations and exceptions. The paper points this out with regard to the issues that are of relevance for the gaming industry, as this is where the use of digital designs is most versatile and relevant.

scholarly journals Perlindungan Hukum atas Desain Industri Berdasarkan Undang-Undang No 31 T Ahun 2000

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-301
Author(s):  
Ida Ayu Mas lndriani ◽  
Ni Made Jaya Senastri ◽  
Ni Made Puspasutari Ujianti
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Industrial Design ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
Design Law ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Definition Of

Intellectual property rights including industrial designs. The idea of ​​industrial design safety is based on the belief that human imagination, taste and initiative are closely linked to industrial design. The state grants protection against new industrial designs. The definition of the rule of law used in the legal protection of industrial designs is based on Law No. 31 of 2000. One of the components in this case is the protection of human rights which is the guideline for the legal protection of industrial designs. There are two forms of industrial design legal protection, which include preventive legal protection and repressive legal protection. This study aims to examine the form of legal protection for industrial designs based on Law No. 31 of 2000 and analyze the legal implications if the design rights holder does not register their industrial designs. This research was designed using normative research with a conceptual approach. The data used are primary and secondary data obtained through documentation and recording. The results of the study indicate that preventive legal protection is contained in the Act which is used to prevent violations and a description of the implementation of obligations while repressive legal protection is security in the form of sanctions for violations that have been committed. In view of this and considering the existence of protection in the form of the industrial design law, the designer can prevent the occurrence of plagiarism of his industrial design by registering his industrial design.

20. Design and copyright

2019 ◽  
pp. 341-347
Author(s):  
Paul Torremans
Keyword(s):  
Law Reform ◽  
Design Law ◽  
The Law

Aesthetic designs are protected under the provisions of the Registered Designs Act 1949, while functional designs are governed by the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. This chapter discusses the natural overlap between design law and copyright, and the influence of the law reform in s. 51 CDPA 1988 on the defence created in the British Leyland case. It also looks at the reform of s. 52 CDPA 1988.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document