3 Desirable Design System toward Accession to the Locarno
Agreement for the International Registration of Industrial
Designs (*)
With the globalization of the economy, Japanese companies have been filing an increasing number of design
applications in many countries around the world. Since the design system differs from one country to another, it
is very burdensome for applicants to obtain design rights. Japanese companies are hoping for simpler
application procedures and lower application costs.
Against this background, the Japan Patent Office (JPO) is considering the possibility of accession to the
Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement. The JPO also needs to consider the possibility of accession to the Locarno
Agreement concerning an international design classification system that has been adopted by many countries. Ifprior design searches are conducted by use of the international design classification instead of the Japanesedesign classification, searches would become more burdensome because it would not be possible to accurately
narrow down search results due to the lack of a detailed classification scheme.
The purpose of this research is to discuss the pros and cons of Japan’s accession to the Locarno Agreement.
Furthermore, in preparation of Japan’s official adoption of the international design classification, this research
determines what means, method, etc., of classification implementation should be taken in order to enable
Japanese users and JPO design examiners to use the classification in an effective manner. This research also
aims to propose the measures that Japan should take upon and after its accession to the Locarno Agreement.

Ⅰ Introduction
1

Background and purpose of this study
With the globalization of the economy,
Japanese companies have been filing an
increasing number of design applications in many
countries around the world. Since the design
system differs from one country to another, it isvery burdensome for applicants to obtain design
rights. Japanese companies are hoping for simpler
application procedures and lower application
costs.
Against this background, in an effort to
reduce the burdens on Japanese companies, the
JPO is considering the possibility of accession to
the Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement, whichallows an applicant to file an application in
multiple member countries by filing a single
application with the International Bureau. At thesame time, the JPO needs to consider the
possibility of accession to the Locarno Agreement
Establishing an International Classification for
Industrial Designs (hereinafter referred to as the“Locarno Agreement”) in order to adopt aninternational design classification (hereinafterreferred to as the “Locarno Classification”). Since
the Locarno Classification has been adopted bymany countries, the accession to the Locarno
Agreement would be important from theperspective of international harmonization anduser convenience in conducting searches ondesigns registered in other countries.
Any applicant who files an international
design application under the Hague Agreement isrequired to classify the article according to the
Locarno Classification. Therefore, if Japan signs
the Locarno Agreement, it would help Japaneseapplicants who file an international application
determine the classes of their articles under the
Locarno Classification. Consequently, Japanesedesign gazettes would be able to classify designs
correctly according to the Locarno Classification,
allowing not only Japanese users but also users
around the world to conduct accurate searches on
Japanese design gazettes by using the world’scommon classification system. This would benefit
Japanese companies by helping them make a
judgment of similarity or dissimilarity when filingan international application and also by deterring
counterfeiting of Japanese designs in othercountries.
Japan uses its own design classification,
which has detailed classes to enable efficient andaccurate substantive examination of designs. On
the other hand, the Locarno Classification is notdetailed enough because it is designed to be used
as a general information management tool. Ifprior design searches are conducted by use of the(*) This is an English translation of the summary of the FY2011 JPO-commissioned research study report on the issues
related to the industrial property rights system.
●

IIP Bulletin 2012 Vol.21

1 ●Locarno Classification instead of the Japanesedesign classification, searches would become
more burdensome because it would be impossible
to accurately narrow down search results due tothe lack of a detailed classification scheme.
The purpose of this research is to examine
whether Japan should sign the Locarno
Agreement from the perspective of its merits anddemerits for Japanese users and, in preparation
for Japan’s official adoption of the LocarnoClassification, to study how the LocarnoClassification is used in other countries and findthe most efficient means, method, etc., for users
and JPO’s design examiners who are in a position
to use the Locarno Classification, and propose
measures that Japan should take when and after
Japan signs the Locarno Agreement.

1. Questions about the outline of the respondentcompany
2. Questions about the respondent company’s
design applications filed in other countries
3. Questions about the Hague Agreement
4. Questions about the Locarno Classification

2- A first-stage interview survey to collectdetailed information and identify issues basedon the results of the preceding domestic
questionnaire survey (8 organizations)- A second-stage interview survey to collectdetailed information based on the results of thepreceding first-stage interview survey (18organizations)- An interview survey of search companies andagents that classify designs according to the
Locarno Classification or conduct searches byusing said Classification (2 organizations)- An interview survey of organizations using thesystem (2 organizations)

Method of conducting this study

In order to collect information for the
research contents explained above, I conducted adomestic and overseas literature study, adomestic questionnaire survey, a domestic
interview survey, an overseas questionnaire
survey, and an overseas interview survey. A
committee for this research was established to
discuss the method and results of these study andsurveys.
(1) Domestic and foreign literature search
A domestic and foreign literature search was
conducted to collect basic data for discussions in
the committee and to prepare referential
materials for a domestic questionnaire survey, adomestic interview survey, an overseas
questionnaire survey, and an overseas interview
survey. Relevant information in and outside Japanwas collected based on the Committee’s advice on
useful literature and also through web searches
on such online materials such as domestic
databases, websites of overseas IP Offices, andonline materials publicized by various councils,
committees, etc.
(2) Domestic questionnaire survey
A survey questionnaire was sent to the top
1050 organizations, including domestic companies
that were selected based on the total number ofdesign applications filed from 2006 to 2010. The
primary purpose of this survey was to collectinformation (users’ needs) useful for making iteasier for domestic applicants to use the LocarnoClassification.

●(3) Domestic interview survey
A domestic interview survey was conducted
on a total of 30 organizations in the following fourways. The purpose of this survey was to collectdetailed information on Japanese users’ opinions
by asking them about the merits and demerits of
the Locarno Classification and to find the mosteffective way of implementing the LocarnoClassification for Japanese users in the event thatJapan signs the Locarno Agreement.

(4) Overseas questionnaire survey
A survey questionnaire was sent to 16
foreign IP Offices, of which 12 IP Offices
responded. The purpose of this survey was to ask
foreign IP Offices that have signed aninternational agreement (the Hague Agreement,
etc.)
toprovideinformation
on
theiradministrative practices, legal systems, fee
systems, and user support programs, etc., andalso to ask foreign IP Offices that have not signed
an international agreement to provide informationon the reasons for their non-accession, their
future plans, and the possible effects of Japan’s
accession.
(5) Overseas interview survey
The subjects for this survey were selected
as follows. First, the top 20 organizations interms of the number of design registrations(yearly total) from 2007 to 2009 were identified
for Europe, the U.S, and South Korea respectively.
From among them, for each of the three countries,
2 ●IIP Bulletin 2012 Vol.21

10 organizations were selected that were “ranked
high in terms of the number of registrations(aggregate total) from 2007 to 2009” and “ranked
high in terms of the number of design
registrations in other countries as well.” Finally,
mostly among from these 10 companies, threeorganizations were selected for each country asinterview subjects.
In the course of interviews, a unique set ofquestions was asked to each organization in orderto obtain information useful for Japan’s
implementation of the Locarno Classification.
In interviews with foreign companies,
questions were asked to collect opinions fromusers about the merits and demerits of the use of
the Locarno Classification in conducting design
searches and classifying designs and also about
their use of the Japanese design classification In
interviews with foreign IP Offices, questions
were asked to obtain additional information on the
points about which their answers to the overseas
questionnaire survey were unclear and also tofind what measures those IP Offices actually took
to solve such kinds of issues that Japan would
face after adoption of the Locarno Classification.

Ⅱ Necessary Changes in the
Design System for Japan’s
Future Accession to the Locarno
Agreement
After conducting the abovementioned
surveys, the research results were analyzed by
the Committee as follows.
1

Japan’s future accession to the Locarno
Agreement

Japan has the experience of establishing thehighly sophisticated Japanese design classification,
setting the definition of each class, and managing
and maintaining the classification system.
Therefore, Japan would be able to contribute to
making appropriate alterations to the LocarnoClassification by proposing specific alterations
and definitions.
If Japan signs the Locarno Agreement, Japan
would be qualified to submit proposals on various
matters related to the Locarno Agreement. Japan
would be able to lead the discussions of futurerevisions of the Classification. Consequently,
Japan would be able to propose a revision thatwould make the Locarno Classification truly
convenient for Japanese users.
Therefore, it would be beneficial for Japan to●

IIP Bulletin 2012 Vol.21

sign the Locarno Agreement so that Japan could
participate in the discussions about the revisionof the Locarno Agreement by proposing a future
direction and specific alterations of the LocarnoClassification.
In recent years, the number of member
countries of the Locarno Agreement has been
increasing. Moreover, the Locarno Classification
has been adopted as a primary classification
system by some of the non-member countries inwhich Japanese users have been actively filingdesign applications and some of the member
countries of the Hague Agreement as well assome of the non-member countries of the Hague
Agreement that Japanese users are hoping will
become members. Like the U.S., some of thenon-members of the Locarno Agreement thathave their own classification systems specify theclasses of designs in their gazettes according to
the Locarno Classification as additionalclassification information.
With further globalization of Japanesecompanies’ business activities, there will be more
opportunities for them to use the Locarno
Agreement in ways such as conducting searches
on designs registered in the abovementioned
countries and specifying the classes of designs intheir applications according to the Locarno
Agreement. As a result, the benefits of the
Locarno Agreement will continue to increase.
All of these facts suggest that it would bedesirable for Japan to sign the Locarno
Agreement in order to adopt the LocarnoClassification, which is very convenient for users.
Since the latest information on futurerevisions, etc., of the Locarno Classification andthe use of said Classification by other countries
would help Japanese users remain competitive inglobal business activities, the JPO is expected toefficiently distribute such information to Japaneseusers. The accession to the Locarno Agreement
would be necessary to ensure such efficient
information distribution.

3 ●Number ofMember Countries

Members of the Locarno Agreement

60

52

51

50
37

40
30
20
5

10

1971

12

14

1980

1990

2000

Year

2010

Design Classification of Each Country

Top 10 countries in terms of the number of design applications (10,000 or more /Year 2010)

SubstanGenevative
Locarno Act of
examinatheCountry Agreem Hague tion/non
ent Agreem -examin
ent
ation

Use of the
LocarnoClassification

Whether
LocarnoWhether the OfficeeachClassificati
checks theUse of any
applicantclass
Classifieronotherspecifies a specified
specified inclassification class in an in an
application applicationgazettes

OthersWebsite on the designclassification, etc. (URL)

Japan

×

×

Substantive
examination

Locarno Classification,
9th ed. (Japanesetranslation available)

Japanesedesignclassification

×―OfficeSpecified

http://www.jpo.go.jp/shiryou/s_s
onota/isy ou_bunrui.htm

US

×

×

Substantive
examination

LocarnoClassification,
9th ed.

U.S.Cl×―

OfficeSpecifiedCorrelationbetween the http://www.uspto.gov/patents/re
US classification and theLocarno Classification sources/classification/handbook/○○

Applicant. If theapplicant does
not assign aclass, the Office
will.

○

○

OHIM

Korea

China

Turkey

Italy

Spain

Germany

×

○

○

×

○

○

○

○

○

Non-exa
mination

LocarnoClassification, (Euro Locarno)
9th ed.

Substantive
examination

Locarno Classification,
9th ed. (Korean Korean designtranslation available) classification

×

Locarno Classification,
Non-exa
9th ed. (Chinese
minationtranslation available)○

Locarno Classification,
Substantive
9th ed. (Turkish
examinationtranslation available)

○

○

○

Non-exa
mination

Non-exa
mination

Locarno Classification,
9th ed. (Italiantranslation available)

LocarnoClassification,
9th ed.

Non-exa Locarno Classification,
9th ed. (German
minationtranslation available)

None

Abolished

None
None

None

Number Number Number Number Numberofof design of design of design ofsmallest designs
applicatio applicati applicati
units ofperns in
ons inons in classifica smallest
tion
2009
2008
2010
unit
33,56930,87531,756

3,193

9.9

27,78125,80628,3015,000

5.7

72,75669,44974,596219

340.6

58,91259,53758,974

3,581

16.5

seven.jsp

○

○

○

×

×

http://oami.europa.eu/ows/rw/pa
ges/RCD/regProcess/classificati
on.en.do

Specified

http://www.kipO.gO.kr/kpo/user.
tdf?a=user.html.HtmlApp&c=8028&catmenu=m06_03_05
http://www.sipo.gov.cn/wxfw/flgj/gjwgsjfl/

ApplicantSpecified○

ApplicantSpecified atleast in the
Office’s DB

312,904

351,342421,273219

1,923.6○

ApplicantSpecified
Office-Exa (according to thequestionnaireminersurvey)http://www.tpe.gov.tr/portal/def
ault_en.jsp?sayfa=141

29,954

27,15930,441

219

139.0

○

Applicant Specified at
Office-Exa least in the
Office’s DB
miner

http://www.uibm.gov.it/uibm/dati/Classe.aspx－

28,426

－

219

129.8

Specified atleast in the
Office’s DB

http://www.oepm.es/en/disenos_
industriales/index.html

11,244

13,141

14,767219

67.4

http://www.dpma.de/english/ser
vice/classifications/index.html

49,14635,431

47,951219

219.0

14,901

16,944

16,729

219

76.4

4,074

3,926

4,084

1,660

2.5

―

―

OfficeSpecified

OfficeSystem to search for an
appropriate class of the
Locarno Classification by using
a product name

France○○Non-exa
mination

LocarnoClassification,
9th ed. (Frenchtranslation
available)

None

×

―

OfficeSpecified

UK

○

×

Non-exa
mination

LocarnoClassification,
7th ed.

UK
classification

×―OfficeSpecified

Canada××

Substantive
examination

None

Canadianclassification

×―OfficeNot stated

http://www.ic.gc.ca/app/opiccipo/id/dsplySrch.do?lang=eng
http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cip
ointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/w
r00255.html#id_app_proc_exam

5,282

4,269

5,142

1,022

5.0

Czech

○

×

Substantive
examination

Locarno Classification,
9th ed. (Czech
translation available)

None

○

○

ApplicantSpecified

http://www.upv.cz/en/publications/classsification-systems/classification--industrial-designs.html

1,083

953

786

219

3.6

WIPO

―

―

―

Locarno Classification,
9th ed. used forinternational design
applications filed
under the Hague
Agreement―○○

ApplicantSpecified

http://www.wipo.int/classificatio
ns/locarno/en,
http://www.wipo.int/hague/en/st
atistics/

7,920

8,872

11,238219

51.3

http://www.inpi.fr/fr/dessins-et-modele
s/boite-a-outils-dessins-et-modeles/cl
assification-de-locarno.html?PHPSESSI
D=86aca698c772bef22ce926de69a9a7b9
According to the
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/design/dquestionnaire survey, UK- applying/d-after.htm
will switch to the sole use
http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/design/dof the LocarnoClassification.
-applying/d-after/d-class.htm* The number of design applications in Japan, the U.S., OHIM, Korea, and China were cited from the Japan Patent Office Annual
Report 2011 issued by the JPO. (http://www.jpo.go.jp/cgi/link.cgi?url=/shiryou/toushin/nenji/nenpou2011_index.htm)
Since the numbers of design applications in Italy in 2008 and 2010 are not available, they are indicated as “-.” The number ofdesign applications per smallest unit of classification was calculated based on the number of design applications filed in 2009.
(When the top 10 countries in terms of the number of design applications were selected, the data for 2009 was used for Italy.)
The data for any other countries were cited from their respective websites or the World Intellectual Property Indicators - 2011
Edition issued by WIPO. (http://www.wipo.int/ipstats/en/wipi/index.html)* Information on design classifications, etc., was collected from the websites at the URL shown in the table, from the replies to theoverseas questionnaire survey and the overseas interview survey, and from the data on various countries available at the JPO
website.

●4 ●IIP Bulletin 2012 Vol.21

2

necessary to improve the accuracy ofconcordance information concerning the LocarnoClassification
andtheJapanesedesignclassification. A detailed examination must be
conducted on the concordance relationships
between the two classification systems so thatthe appropriate class for each article may be
identified according to the Locarno Classification.
In order to maintain the accuracy of thecurrent Japanese design classification practices
even after the adoption of the LocarnoClassification, the JPO should thoroughly review
its administrative management and administrative
system for assignment, maintenance, andmanagement of the Classification. The results of
the review should be disclosed and announced to
the Japanese users of the classification system.
If the Locarno Classification becomes asdetailed as the Japanese design classification, thecoexistence of the two classification systems
would become unnecessary. The adoption of the
Locarno Classification alone would be sufficient.

The use of the current Japanese deignclassification after Japan’s accession to
the Locarno Agreement

If Japan signs the Locarno Agreement, there
must be a consensus on how to treat the current
Japanese design classification.
While the Locarno Classification has neither
clear definitions of classes nor a scheme ofdetailedclasses,theJapanesedesignclassification has a scheme of detailed classes andan accurate system of classification assignment.
Therefore, Japanese users who are accustomed tosuch a detailed Japanese classification systemhave requested that the Japanese designclassification should coexist with the LocarnoClassification if Japan signs the Locarno
Agreement.
Therefore, it would be desirable to use theJapanese design classification in parallel with the
Locarno Classification after it is adopted.
For successful coexistence, it will be

The Current Japanese Design Classification after the Adoption of the Locarno Classification
1
2

3
4
5
No response

Coexistence of both classifications is desirable.
The current Japanese design classification may be abolished on thecondition that the Locarno Classification is revised to be as
detailed as the Japanese design classification.
The Locarno Classification alone would suffice. The Japanesedesign classification may be abolished.
Not sure.
OthersNumber of respondents

Number of
Respondents

Proportion

185

52.3%

69

19.5%

9

2.5%

64
5
26
354

18.1%
1.4%
7.3%
100.0%

Opinions about the treatment of the Japanese design classification after Japan’s accession to the Locarno
Agreement(Domestic interview survey)
Opinions that the Coexistence of both classifications is desirable- Even if the Locarno Classification is adopted, since it often fails to properly narrow down search
results, the current Japanese design classification (D Term) should remain available. (Company D,
Company G, Company M)- We use the Japanese design classification in most cases and hope to see it continue. (Company W,
Company Y, Search A)- We hope that the Locarno Classification will be revised to be similar to the Japanese designclassification. (Company P)
Opinions that the Japanese design classification should continue but may be unified into the
Locarno Classification if certain conditions are met- If Japan signs the Hague Agreement, the Locarno Classification should coexist with the current
Japanese design classification. Or, it might be appropriate to create a new design classification (hybrid●

IIP Bulletin 2012 Vol.21

5 ●version) by adopting the Locarno Classification as the higher classes of the Japanese design classificationand continuing to use the Japanese design classification as the lower classes. (Company B, Company C,
Company H, Company T)- We hope that Japan will adopt a hybrid version as its design classification and that the hybrid version
will be adopted as an international design classification as well. (Company A, Company D)- If the Locarno Classification alone is to be adopted, we hope that it will be revised to be as detailed as
the Japanese design classification. (Company E, Company Q, Company I, Company N)- Like the IPC for patents, if the Locarno Classification is revised to be a more convenient system, theadoption of the Locarno Classification alone would suffice. In that case, the Japanese designclassification may be abolished. (Company Z)- We hope to see the Japanese design classification continue even after the Locarno Classification isadopted. The Japanese design classification may be abolished if the following conditions are met: (1) the
Locarno Classification is revised to be as detailed as the Japanese design classification, (2) if theclassification is revised, classes are reassigned to the past data on the design rights that are still
effective, and (3) concordance information between the Japanese design classification and the LocarnoClassification is provided. (Company X)(Domestic questionnaire survey)- Since the Locarno Classification lacks a detailed classification scheme, we hope to see the Japanesedesign classification continue even after the adoption of the Locarno Classification.

3

Establishment of the definition of eachclass and the classification assignment
rules of the Locarno Classification

Since the Japanese design classification
clearly defines each class, it is possible toaccurately classify designs and conduct accurate
and efficient searches under the classification. On
the other hand, the Locarno Classification only
has ambiguous class definitions and assignment
rules and lacks detailed classes. Due to these
problems, the search efficiency of the LocarnoClassification is relatively low.
If Japan adopts and implements the LocarnoClassification, the JPO needs to take measures inorder to make the Locarno Classification
convenient for Japanese users. For example, itwould be appropriate to define each class of the
Locarno Classification and clarify which classshould be assigned to each article under the
Locarno Classification.
In the process of defining each class, it might
be necessary to continue studying and discussing
the following points:(i) identifying sample cases where the accuracyof design classification practices under the
Locarno Classification varied from one
country to another, discussing whether thisvariance may be solved by the establishmentof the definition of each class, investigating
the degree of class definition precisionnecessary to solve the variance;●(ii) studying the International Bureau’s judgment
criteria (for requesting the applicant to makea correction) applicable to the classes
specifiedininternational applications
according to the Locarno Classification, andidentifying sample cases and reflecting the
judgment criteria in the definition of eachclass and in the classification assignment
rules;(iii) discussing specifically how the LocarnoClassification should be used in light of theresults of the study specified in (i) above;(iv) creatingconcordance
information
concerning the Locarno Classification and
the Japanese design classification in order toensure the continuous use of the Japanesedesign classification in Japan; and(v) studying the points listed (i) to (iv) above, inconsideration of the issue concerning theextent to which the JPO should check
whether each international application meetsthe formality criteria and lists an appropriateclass according to the Locarno Classification,
if Japan signs the Geneva Act of the Hague
Agreement and requires the JPO to function
as an intermediary IP Office.

6 ●IIP Bulletin 2012 Vol.21

Problems in the Locarno Classification Faced by the Users Who Find the Classification Difficult to Use

1
2
3
4
5
6
No answers

We have used the Classification and found no problems.
We have used the Classification but found it difficult to use.
We plan to use the Classification and find no particular
problems.
We plan to use the Classification but find it difficult to use.
We have not and will not use the Classification.
OthersNumber of respondents

1
2
3
4
5
No answers

Impossible to read the table of the Locarno Classification(written in English, French)
Impossible or difficult to understand the overall structure of
the Locarno Classification
Impossible or difficult to understand the definition of thearticles covered by each class
Too many search results for one class (number of results per
set)
OthersNumber of respondents

4

Active participation in the discussions
about future revision of the LocarnoClassification

In order to handle a worldwide increase in
the number of registered designs and to improvethe efficiency of design searches, etc., theInternational Bureau and other organizations
have been leading discussions on the futurerevision of the Locarno Classification.
Japan should advocate that the LocarnoClassification should be as detailed as theJapanese design classification in order to makethe Locarno Classification more convenient forJapanese users. Japan should also point out thenecessity to establish the definition of each classof the Locarno Classification as well asclassification assignment rules. It is important forJapan to participate in the discussions on the
future direction of the Locarno Classification andpromotefurther
improvementofsaidClassification
andgreaterinternational
harmonization of the implementation of said●

IIP Bulletin 2012 Vol.21

Number of
Respondents

Proportion

44
22
74

12.4%
6.2%
20.9%

76
65
39
34

21.5%
18.4%
11.0%
9.6%

354

100.0%

Number of
Respondents

Proportion

43

43.9%

61

62.2%

45

45.9%

32

32.7%

1
4

1.0%
4.1%

98

100.0%Classification in order to make said Classificationeasier to use for Japanese users.
Having long experience in implementing andmanaging a detailed design classification system,
Japan should take the initiative in the discussions
and submit specific proposals in collaboration
with other countries that took the same stance asJapan.
As a first step, Japan needs to collectinformation on the schemes and use of theclassifications adopted in other countries. Basedon the collected information, Japan needs todevise a classification system that is easily
acceptable to other countries and convenient forJapanese users in a practical sense.
While Japan should request the International
Bureau to subdivide the classes and subclasses of
the Locarno Classification, Japan should carefully
determine which classes or subclasses to firstseek subdivision by further analyzing issues andstudying user needs.

7 ●Opinions about Japan’s Initiative in Determining the Direction of the Revision of the LocarnoClassification(Domestic interview survey)- The JPO should, if possible, take the initiative in determining how to modify the Locarno Classification.
(Company E)- The JPO should take the initiative in revising the Locarno Classification to be as detailed as theJapanese design classification. (Company A, Company C, Company F, Company P, Company T)(Reasons: If China and other countries sign the Hague Agreement, the current Locarno Classification
would generate a significant number of inaccurate search results when searches are conducted on theregistrations classified under the Locarno Classification. Therefore, it would be very beneficial for
Japan, China, and the U.S., to adopt the same design classification.)- The JPO should actively submit opinions about the assignment of a mode class to each registration
classified under the Locarno Classification. (Company B)- Some companies are concerned that the use of the current Locarno Classification would increase thenumber of prior design searches or generate inaccurate search results. The JPO should propose that
other countries’ IP Offices and relevant authorities establish a clear definition of each class (JAMA IP
Expert Committee)(Domestic questionnaire survey)- The JPO should propose that the Japanese design classification be used as a reference in the course of arevision of the Locarno Classification.
- In some countries, the scope of the effect of a design right is limited to the scope of the class assigned
under the Locarno Classification. The JPO should propose that those countries abolish this type oflimitation.

5

Supports for understanding the LocarnoClassification

If Japan signs the Geneva Act of the Hague
Agreement, any Japanese applicant who files aninternational design application is required toclassify the design claimed in the application inaccordance with the Locarno Classification.
Any international application recorded as aninternational registration will be publicized by theInternational Bureau. Since the LocarnoClassification is expected to be used as a tool tosearchthesepublicizedinternational
registrations, there will be more opportunities forJapanese users to use the Locarno Classification.
On the other hand, most Japanese users are
not familiar with the Locarno Classification. Dueto the shortage of experts in Japan who areversed in the Locarno Classification, applicantsneed to deepen their understanding of the
Locarno Classification by themselves.
IP experts such as patent agents also need todeepen their understanding of the LocarnoClassification so that they can give basic advice.
Therefore, the JPO should make efforts tocollect and distribute information on the LocarnoClassification and other countries’ classifications.

●

8 ●IIP Bulletin 2012 Vol.21

Requests for Provision of Information on the Locarno Classification(Domestic interview survey)
Opinions concerning information necessary for assignment of classes- When preparing a design application for an article that embodies a new concept, we assign a class withreference to the concordance data between the Japanese design classification and the LocarnoClassification. (Company B)- Even if the current Locarno Classification is adopted, we would like to have the definition of each class.
(Company K)- Most of our design applications fall under a certain class of the Locarno Classification (19-06: Materials
and instruments for writing by hand, for drawing, for painting, for sculpture, for engraving and for otherartistic techniques). Therefore, the adoption of the Locarno Classification would not cause any
problems as far as we are concerned. However, the definition of each class would be necessary andshould be established. (Company N)- We do not find any particular problems in asaccession to classes under the Locarno Classification.
However, a consultation service should be provided so that we can obtain advice when we file a design
application for an article that we do not regularly handle. (Company W)
Requests for checking of the assigned classes- If an applicant assigns a class according to the Locarno Classification and files an international
application via the JPO, the JPO should check (examine) whether the assigned class was correct inaccordance with the Locarno Classification. (Design Committee of the JIPA)
Requests for other assistance- We strongly hope to have a system such as the IPDL that allows us to search international design
applications designating Japan. Furthermore, it might be convenient if the IPDL allows us to search allof the international design applications. However, this is not indispensable because the website of the
OHIM allows us to search all of the international design applications. (Company E)- We hope to have a system with a function that allows us to search old gazettes in the IPDL by imputing
a class of the current classification and having it automatically converted to the corresponding class ofthe old classification, so that documents classified under the old classification may be searched at thesame time. (Company U)- The WIPO’s search system is very slow. We hope to see the JPO function as a hub Office and offer not
only the WIPO’s search system but also the search systems of other countries. Those systems do nothave to be translated into Japanese as long as they are provided in English. (Company B)(Domestic questionnaire survey)- It would be beneficial if seminars and training programs are offered. In addition, educational assistanceshould be provided to patent agents and corporate IP experts.
- We hope to receive information written in Japanese on the definition of each class of the LocarnoClassification.
- We hope to receive a concordance table between the Locarno Classification and the Japanese designclassification.
- We hope to see the IPDL improved in terms of the conversion service between the Japanese designclassification and the Locarno Classification.
(Senior Researcher: Yasuhiko SUZUKI)●IIP Bulletin 2012 Vol.21

9 ●