25.5.2023
4.2.2.
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 184/43
In addition to the cost of filing, there are three types of fees:
— the registration fee of EUR 230, to which an additional registration fee of EUR 115 may be added for two to ten additional registrations and EUR 50 beyond ten; — the publication fee of EUR 120 which may be increased by EUR 60 for two to ten additional publications and EUR 30 beyond ten; — the deferred publication fee of EUR 40 which may be increased by EUR 20 for two to ten designs and by EUR 10 beyond ten.
4.2.3.
The fees payable depend on two factors:
— the number of designs contained in the application; — whether or not publication of the design will be deferred.
4.2.4.
Their structure corresponds to the following model:
— a basic fee for a single design or the first design of a multiple application; — a reduced fee for the second to tenth designs; — a further fee reduction per design from the 11th design onwards.
4.2.5.
The proposal for a regulation proposes reducing the cost of the first renewal (after five years) to EUR 70 and increasing the second renewal (after 10 years) to EUR 140, the third renewal (after 15 years) to EUR 280, and the fourth renewal (after 20 years) to EUR 560.
The total fees for the first two renewals remain the same as the current amount, i.e.
EUR 210 in total, but the fees for the subsequent renewals increase drastically.
4.2.6.
This measure does not seem to be as favourable for individual designers and SMEs as it claims.
The EESC therefore calls for lower fees for SMEs and individual designers, perhaps in proportion to their turnover.
4.2.7.
Moreover, the EESC does not believe that modifying the fee structure by merging publication and registration fees will reduce the total cost of the fees. 4.3.
Abolition of the ‘unity of class’ requirement 4.3.1.
Even though a filing may relate to several designs, they must be intended to be incorporated into or applied to products in the same ‘class’, under the ‘unity of class’ requirement.
These classes are delineated in a list called the Locarno Classification.
4.3.2.
According to Article 2(1) of the Locarno Agreement, the Locarno Classification ‘shall be solely of an administrative character’, and comprises: — a list of classes and subclasses; — an alphabetical list of goods in which industrial designs are incorporated, with an indication of the classes and subclasses into which they fall; — explanatory notes.
4.3.3.
The abolition of the ‘unity of class’ requirement provided for in the proposal for a regulation, which would allow companies to file multiple applications for designs, combining multiple designs in a single application, without needing to be limited to products belonging to the same Locarno class, aims to encourage SMEs and individual designers to file their designs for protection.
4.3.4.
In the EESC’s view, the simplification brought about by abolishing the ‘unity of class’ rule is necessary but not sufficient, as there is still a need to improve the usability of the design filing systems available on the websites of the national industrial property offices and the EUIPO.
4.3.5.
Offices could make use of the expertise of patent agents, thus making it easier for SMEs and individual designers to protect their designs.
4.3.6.
Patent agents will of course continue to support right holders in exploiting their designs and to represent them in disputes.