Protection scope of design patent

Design patent (Industrial Design) refers to a new design that is aesthetically pleasing and suitable for industrial application based on the shape, pattern, color or combination of a product. Appearance design refers to the appearance design of industrial products, that is, the style of industrial products. What is the scope of protection of a design patent? The editor of Legal Savior Network has compiled relevant knowledge for you, hoping it will be helpful to you.

Scope of protection of design patent

Confirming the scope of protection of design patent should be based on reviewing pictures. The name and brief description of the design shall be reviewed as a supplement. my country's patent law stipulates that the design name should briefly and accurately indicate the product requested. The brief description of the design should state the main creative parts of the product using the design, the colors requested for protection, omitted views, etc. The brief description must not use commercial promotional terms, nor can it be used to explain the performance and use of the product.

For three-dimensional design products, the views of the design should be orthographic six-sided views and three-dimensional views (or photos); for the views of the flat design , should be a two-sided view. Although the above three have a primary and secondary relationship, they are all of great significance in confirming the scope of protection of the design. For example, the name of the design can affect the classification of the design product, and the brief description of the design can explain and supplement the view of the design.

Our court has handled a patent infringement dispute case between the plaintiff Dong and the defendant a publishing house in Beijing. The plaintiff Dong was the patentee of the "word card" design. The patent number is xxxxx, and the brief description of the design is recorded as follows:

1. This card is a sheet, and other views are omitted;

2. This card is for students to learn words. One side of the card prints the word and its phonetic notation, and the other side prints the annotation of the word to improve the learning effect;

3. The discontinuous lines in the picture are the dividing lines for dividing small cards, so that the divider can divide the small cards;

4. The small lines in the picture are The number of cards depends on the size of the paper format;

5. The set of cards can be bound into a book.

The appearance designThe plan view of is twelve small rectangular grids divided by dotted lines within a rectangular solid line. The defendant, a publishing house in Beijing, published a series of "English Cards" books. The front and back pages of the book were divided into four rectangular boxes by dotted lines at corresponding positions. Each rectangular box contained English words and phrases according to serial numbers. Phrases, there are corresponding Chinese explanations according to serial numbers in the corresponding rectangular boxes on the back. After trial, our court held that the plaintiff’s patent is a word card, which limits the use of the design on the card. Therefore, when judging whether the defendant in this case infringes, it should be determined whether the accused product and the plaintiff’s patent belong to the same category, and whether the design The classification is based on the classification number confirmed in the Design Patent Gazette. No cross-category judgments can be made. The word cards and the card-style English book series involved in this case are not of the same category, they are incomparable, and their designs are not identical or similar. Therefore, this court will not support the plaintiff’s lawsuit. After the verdict, the plaintiff appealed. After hearing the case, the court of second instance held that the plan view of Dong’s patented design “word card” product is a rectangular block divided into word cards, and the purpose is to facilitate learners to use them in the form of cards. , improve learning effects. The accused product "Card-Style English" is a series of books, not single-page cards that can be bound into a volume at any time. Therefore, the two are different products and are not identical or similar. Dong's comparison of his product "Word Cards" with the inner pages of the "Card-Style English" book is obviously wrong, and the plaintiff's infringement accusation cannot be established. From the analysis of the above cases, it can be seen that the court of first instance focused on whether the patented product and the alleged infringing product belong to the same category. The name of the product determines the product classification and concluded that there is no infringement.

The court of second instance focused on analyzing the brief description of the patent and the combination of pictures and determined the design points of the design patent. After comparing it with the accused product, it concluded that the conclusion of infringement. It can be seen from this that a comprehensive review of the name, brief description, pictures, photos, etc. of the design is one of the indispensable steps in confirming the scope of design patent protection in our trial cases.