Until a few years ago design law was of minor importance in the Benelux. Those days are over now. Over the last few years multiple decisions have been issued based on registered EU designs, like in this Honda case. Honda has protected the shape of its HONDA MSX125 as a registered EU-design. A Belgian distributor introduces a similar design on the market and the case is taken to court. »design-law
It is a common thought among entrepreneurs that IP rights have no value in China. Nowadays, this (mis-) conception is completely outdated. In 2015 Chinese companies filed more than a million patent applications (a third of the total amount of 3 million patent applications worldwide). Whereas American and Japanese companies filed half a million applications each. China is also the number one country regarding trademark registrations. In 2015 a vast number of 2.8 million trademark applications were filed in China. As a result, an increasing number of Chinese companies can be found in the court of law as the demanding party in trademark infringement cases. »design-law
Design rights are the perfect tool to claim protection of shapes. However, this right has its limitations. Lose parts of an object cannot be protected through design rights. The philosophy behind this is that non-visible parts should be replaceable at all times. Therefore, the manufacturer can only claim design rights for the parts which are visible. However, how far can we take this? »design-law
In 2011 Basil Denton unveils the new rotan bicycle basket, with leather strips. Less than a year later the competition introduces a basket that looks suspiciously alike, the Java New Looks. This likeness is not be accident. A picture of the Basil Denton product served as its inspiration. The director did not want an exact copy, claiming: “We would like to change the baskets a little bit so that they are not exactly the same as Basil”. Basil demands that the baskets are removed from the market. »design-law
Eichholtz sells furniture in all of Europe. At a exhibition in Paris it shows its new tables. The tables are made of glass in a frame with eight corners (colours in gold and nickel) with a bottom plate made of marble. To protect its rights both tables are filed as European designs. When a similar table appears on the market Eichholtz demands a prohibition on this. The other party claims that the design registrations are not valid. The design would not be new and does not have its own character since it has the same shape as the Ascher-diamond. The main question is whether use of the same design for a different product affects novelty. »design-law
MENTOS has been selling chewing gum under the name MENTOS PURE FRESH for several years. In order to protect her rights MENTOS has registered the following trademarks: the logo MENTOS PURE FRESH, the logo MENTOS PURE FRESH 3 and a figurative depiction of the word PURE.
Defendant sells chewing gum under the trademark DENTYNE PURE and has registered its logo as a trademark.
Infringement or not?