Source: http://mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/778788/Patent/Around+The+World+And+Back+Making+A+Champion+Out+Of+Your+Design+With+International+Design+Rights
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 04:26:17+00:00

Document:
The rights encompassing designs are as numerous as the number of designs in the world. As Paul Rand eloquently stated above, obtaining a design right may seem straightforward at first glance; however, depending on your client�s goals, the process can be complicated. One must consider both whether the right should be obtained and where the design should be protected. This article will discuss these considerations and analyze the major regimes for protecting designs.
Should Design Rights Be Obtained?
The first consideration is whether a design patent should be obtained for a particular design. Generally, if the design is unique or has unique aspects, then the owner of the design should seek protection for it to prevent copying by others or close mimicry.1 Further, design rights will only protect the way an object looks, not how it functions.2 As a result, while design patents themselves may be limited in protection, they are a valuable piece of a comprehensive intellectual property portfolio.
In many cases, design patents will issue or receive a final office action in 19 months.3 In contrast, it takes around 24 months for a utility patent to issue or receive a final office action.4� While the length of time for utility and design patents to issue or receive a final office action differs, applicants may apply for both types when their inventions contain both visual and functional features. For example, Columbia Sportswear obtained the following patents for its Omni-Heat products: U.S. Patent No. 8,453,270 (the �270 patent); U.S. Patent No. 8,424,119 (the �119 patent); and U.S. Design Patent No. D657,903 (the �903 design patent). Specifically, the utility patents claimed a heat management material coupled to a base material in order to direct and maintain body heat. The design patent, however, protected the wavy fabric pattern found in different articles, such as the lining of the jacket.
To file an international design application (IDA) under the Hague Agreement, the applicant must have a domicile in the territory of a contracting party (or meet one of the other categories for entitlement).26 The application must include: the applicant�s name, figures, an indication of the product with a Locarno classification,27 and the number of designs and embodiments.28 In addition, applicants must ensure their IDA meets the specific requirements for each country in which they are seeking design protection. For example, the United States requires an oath or declaration from the inventor(s).
Most countries have a mechanism in place to protect designs and utility patents under their national laws. However, the systems to protect both utility patents and designs vary by the depth of review, the time period to receive protection, and the scope of protection. This section analyzes three regimes to specifically obtain design rights: examination, registration, and hybrid systems. Individual country rules are also discussed to illustrate each system.
Hybrid systems incorporate features from both registration and examination systems.63 For example, in Australia and Brazil, designs first follow a registration process.64 However, before the registered design can be enforced, an optional examination process must be completed.65� The hybrid system is therefore optimal for companies that would like to obtain a registration right away but also have the option to examine their registration later, if needed.
With the above analysis in mind, determining where to obtain design protection is complex. Applicants need to consider where the product is made and where their competitors are located. It may be a waste of money to obtain a design patent in the United States, for example, if the product is sold only in Japan and the main competitor is located in Japan. It may also be important to protect designs in the country where they are manufactured, in addition to where they are sold.77 By doing so, competitors will be prevented from selling infringing competing designs and manufacturers will not be able to make the protected design and sell it to another distributor.
Finally, the individual countries� requirements must be taken into consideration. As seen above, design protections are territorial and dependent on national design laws. Not only does the length of protection differ between countries, but also the requirements needed to have a complete design application. Some countries will reject an application for disclosures of the design even outside the country, while others have grace periods to file an application if a disclosure was made anywhere in the world.
For example, in the United States, a public disclosure is not considered prior art if it was made by the designer within one year before the application was filed.78 However, EU disclosure laws are trickier to analyze. RCDs have a one-year grace period for a disclosure made anywhere in the world, similar to the United States.79 Therefore, an application that starts as an unregistered design could enjoy the benefit of the grace period if the applicant intends to file an RCD by the end of the grace period. However, it is �not possible to have the full 3 years of protection as [a UCD] and then to file an application for [an RCD], as the novelty requirement will not then have been met.�80 Savvy design law attorneys will take these discrepancies into account to maximize the number of jurisdictions where the design can be protected.
Unlike beauty, design patents are not only skin deep. Instead, they require a mastery of several competing systems and countries� laws. An applicant�s needs and budget should be carefully considered to best determine where they should obtain design patents and enforce their rights.
1�Why Design Protection?,Swedish Pat. & Registration Off.,https://www.prv.se/en/designs/why-design-protection/(last visited Dec. 11, 2018).
3Design Traditional Total Pendency,U.S. Pat. & Trademark Off.,https://www.uspto.gov/corda/dashboards/patents/main.dashxml?CTNAVID=1006(last visited Dec. 11, 2018).
4October 2018 Patents Data, at a Glance,U.S. Pat. & Trademark Off.,https://www.uspto.gov/dashboards/patents/main.dashxml(last visited Dec. 11, 2018) (showing that the exact time period is 23.9 months).
5�Columbia Sportswear N. Am., Inc. v. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc., No. 3:17-cv-01781-HZ (S.D. Cal. 2017). The case was originally filed in the District of Oregon, and then later transferred to the Southern District of California. Columbia Sportswear N. Am., Inc. v. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc., No. 3:15-cv-00064 (D. Or. Sept. 5, 2017), ECF No. 259.
6Columbia Sportswear, No. 3:15-cv-00064 (D. Or. Aug. 10, 2016), ECF No. 105 (addressing only the validity of the design patent), appeal docketed, No. 18-1329 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 20, 2017).
7 Jury Verdict,Columbia Sportswear, No. 3:17-cv-01781-HZ (S.D. Cal. Sept. 29, 2017), ECF No. 377.
9Id.The validity of both design and utility patents are governed by 35 U.S.C. � 103, among other provisions. Under � 103, an invention or design is obvious if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art would have been obvious to a person having skill in the art, Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1 (1966), or to an ordinary designer,In reRosen, 673 F.2d 388 (C.C.P.A. 1982). However, design patents have a different framework for implementing this test. First, the court must find a primary reference with design characteristics that are basically the same as the claimed design. Durling v. Spectrum Furniture Co., 101 F.3d 100, 103 (Fed. Cir. 1996);see alsoApple, Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd., 678 F.3d 1314, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2012).Under this step, the court needs to �(1) discern the correct visual impression created by the patented design as a whole; and (2) determine whether there is a single reference that creates �basically the same� visual impression.�Durling, 101 F.3d at 103. Second, once a primary reference is found, other references may be used to modify it to create a design with the same overall visual impression as the claimed invention if the secondary references are �so related [to the primary reference] that the appearance of certain ornamental features in one would suggest the application of those features to the other.�In reBorden, 90 F.3d 1570, 1575 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
12SeeSamsung Elecs. Co., Ltd. v. Apple Inc., 137 S. Ct. 429 (2016).
14 Russ Krajec,Advertising and Marketing Uses for Patents and the Deterrent Factor,Anything under Sun Made by Man,https://krajec.com/advertising-and-marketing-uses-for-patents-and-the-deterrent-factor/(last visited Dec. 11, 2018).
16 Christopher Heer et al.,The Benefits of Use of �Patent Pending,�Heer L.,https://www.heerlaw.com/benefits-patent-pending(last updated Oct. 8, 2018).
17 Elizabeth D. Ferrill & Elizabeth A. Shah,The Hidden World of Design Patent Prosecution,Finnegan: Our Insights(Dec. 3, 2015),https://www.finnegan.com/en/insights/the-hidden-world-of-design-patent-prosecution.html.
20FAQ on the Hague Agreement,Eur. Union Intell. Prop. Off.,https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/faq-on-the-hague-agreement(last updated Apr. 18, 2018).
22Id.(explaining that the currency used is Swiss francs).
23Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs: Status,WIPO,http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/treaties/en/documents/pdf/hague.pdf(last updated Nov. 9, 2018).
26How to File Your Application: Entitlement,World Intell. Prop. Org.,http://www.wipo.int/hague/en/how_to/file/entitlement.html(last visited Dec. 11, 2018). To be entitled to file an IDA, an applicant must satisfy at least one of the following conditions (entitlements): (1) be a national of a contracting party; (2) be a national of a member state of an intergovernmental organization that is a contracting party (such as the EU or the African Intellectual Property Organization); (3) have a domicile in the territory of a contracting party; (4) have a real and effective industrial or commercial establishment in the territory of a contracting party, or only under the 1999 Geneva Act; or (5) have a habitual residence in a contracting party.
27Locarno Classification,World Intell. Prop. Org.,http://www.wipo.int/classifications/locarno/en/(last visited Dec. 11, 2018) (defining Locarno classification as an international classification used to register international designs).
28�Brent Dougal,Hague�A New Consideration for US Design Applications,Law360(May 12, 2015),https://www.knobbe.com/sites/default/files/Hague%20%E2%80%94%20A%20New%20Consideration%20For%20US%20Design%20Applications.pdf.
29 Elizabeth D. Ferrill,Selling Globally? Protect Locally�Strategic Planning for Design Rights Worldwide,Full Disclosure(Jan. 2015),https://www.finnegan.com/files/Upload/Newsletters/Full_Disclosure/2015/January/FullDisclosure_Jan15_4.html.
30�Vic Lin,What Is a Design Patent?,Pat. Trademark Blog,http://www.patenttrademarkblog.com/design-patent/(last visited Dec. 11, 2018) (noting that the overall pendency of design applications in the United States is 20 months).
31See Frequently Asked Questions,Mewburn Ellis,http://mewburn.com/resource/frequently-asked-questions(last visited Dec. 11, 2018) (�Registration of a registered Community design can be very fast�perhaps even as quick asone week.� (emphasis added)).
32 35 U.S.C. � 171.
33�Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd. v. Apple Inc., 137 S. Ct. 429, 435 (2016) (�So understood, the term �article of manufacture� is broad enough to encompass both a product sold to a consumer as well as a component of that product.�).
35Design First Office Action Pendency,U.S. Pat. & Trademark Off.,https://www.uspto.gov/corda/dashboards/patents/main.dashxml?CTNAVID=1006(last visited Dec. 11, 2018) (showing that the exact time to receive a first office action is 13.3 months).
36See Design Traditional Total Pendency,supranote 3.
37See35 U.S.C. � 173;U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP)� 1505 (9th ed. Rev. 08.2017, Jan. 2018).
39 37 C.F.R. � 1.362(b).
40�Ish-oh-o [Design Act], Law No. 125 of 1959, art. 2(1), translated in (Japanese Law Translation [JLT DS]),http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?id=44&vm=04&re=02(Japan).
41 35 U.S.C. � 171.
42�Yoichiro Yamaguchi,Japanese Design Law and Practice, 19Balt. L. Rev.417, 420 (1989).
43 Handōtai shūseki kairo no kairo haichi ni kansuru hōritsu [Act on the Circuit Layout of a Semiconductor Integrated Circuits], Law No. 43 of 1985, �� 2�3, translated in (Japanese Law Translation [JLT DS]), http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?id=1841&vm=04&re=01 (Japan).
44�Design Act,supranote 40, at art. 5(i).
45�A grace period allows applicants to file patent or design applications within a certain time (usually six to 12 months) after publicizing the invention and not have the previous disclosure be considered prior art to their applications. Specific details about grace period lengths and disclosures to which the grace period applies vary by country.See Grace Periods for Disclosure of an Invention before Applying for a Patent,Mewburn Ellis,http://mewburn.com/resource/grace-periods-for-disclosure-of-an-invention-before-applying-for-a-patent/(last visited Dec. 11, 2018).
46�Jonathan Osha & Shinya Kimura,Japanese Grace Period Will Be Extended to 12 Months,Osha Liang LLP(June 1, 2018),https://oshaliang.com/newsletter/japanese-grace-period-will-be-extended-to-12-months/.
475.7 Protection of Designs,Japan External Trade Org.,https://www.jetro.go.jp/en/invest/setting_up/section5/page7.html(last visited Dec. 11, 2018).
49 Ferrill,supranote 29 (explaining that completeness of an application occurs when �the application states it has five figures and five figures have been filed�).
51See, e.g.,Locarno Publication,World Intell. Prop. Org.,http://www.wipo.int/classifications/locarno/locpub/en/fr/(last visited Dec. 11, 2018) (illustrating that lamps are found in class 26 while refrigerators are in class 15).
52Designs in the European Union,Eur. Union Intell. Prop. Off.,https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/designs-in-the-european-union(last updated Feb. 19, 2016).
56Unregistered Community Design�Copyright-Like Protection against Copying in Europe,Heinonen(Apr. 16, 2014),http://heinonen.com/en/current/unregistered-community-design-copyright-like-protection-against-copying-in-europe/(�In order to get protection, an UCD must be disclosed in order to become reasonably known to the relevant circles in the European Union.�).
57 Helika Jurgenson,Design Patents and Utility Models in China: Know before You Go,Your IP Insider(July 6, 2017),http://www.youripinsider.eu/design-patents-utility-models-china/.
60See�Zhōnghu� R�nm�n G�ngh�gu� Zhuānl� Fă [Patent Law of the People�s Republic of China] (promulgated by the Standing Comm. Nat�l People�s Cong., Mar. 12, 1984, effective Apr. 1, 1985), art. 23 (�Any design for which patent right may be granted must not be identical with or similar to any design which, before the date of filing, has been publicly disclosed in publications in the country or abroad or has been publicly used in the country, and must not collide with any legal prior rights obtained by any other person.�).
62�Dan Harris,China Design Patents: The Info We Need,China L. Blog(June 9, 2018),https://www.chinalawblog.com/2018/06/china-design-patents-the-info-we-need.html.
66Don�t Publicise Your Design,IP Austl.,https://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/designs/applying-design/dont-publicise-your-design(last updated Mar. 1, 2016).
68Registration and Certification,IP Austl.,https://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/designs/understanding-designs/registration-and-certification(last updated Mar. 3, 2016).
73Don�t Publicise Your Design,supranote 66.
74 �Michelle Lee & Edward Genocchio,Ensuring Valid Protection of Your Design in Australia,Spruson & Ferguson(Sept. 11, 2017),https://www.spruson.com/ensuring-valid-protection-of-your-design-australia.
76 Lee & Genocchio,supranote 74.
77See How Do I Protect My Registered Design Globally?,IP Foundry,https://ipfoundry.io/how-do-i-protect-my-registered-design-globally/(last updated Jan. 17, 2018).
79Basic Questions,Eur. Union Intell. Prop. Off.,https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/cd-general-questions(last updated Apr. 18, 2018).
80Unregistered Community Design,Eur. Union Intell. Prop. Off.,�https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/unregistered-community-design(last updated May 11, 2018).

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 art. 2
 art. 5
 art. 23