Intellectual Property Laws

JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA

DESIGN ACT, 2000

SUBMITTED BY:-
JIJO RAJ P
B.A. LL.B(H.)
15BLW0011

Design Rights, 2000 Page 1

 Intellectual Property Laws

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I, would like to express my deep sense of gratitude towards our IPR teacher, Prof.

Shabana . It was she who gave me a project on this topic and guided me thoroughly

to make this project easily. The process of making this project gave me

information about a lot of things which I did not know earlier and this would not

have been possible without Mam’s help.

I would also like to thank my friends and family members who helped me in the

making of this project.

Design Rights, 2000 Page 2

 Intellectual Property Laws

CONTENTS

SL. PARTICULARS
1. INTRODUCTION
2. WHAT IS AN “ARTICLE” UNDER THE ACT?
3. WHO CAN APPLY FOR REGISTRATION OF
A DESIGN?
4. WHAT IS THE MEANING “DESIGN”
WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE DESIGNS
ACT?
5. WHAT IS THE PROCESS OF
REGISTRATION?
6. WHAT CAN BE REGISTERED UNDER THE
ACT?
7. TERM OF PROTECTION
8. PROTECTION FROM INFRINGEMENT
9. NOTABLE EXAMPLES OF “DESIGNS” IN
INDIA
10. NOTABLE EXAMPLES OF “DESIGNS” IN
INDIA
11. WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS CONFERRED BY
REGISTRATION?
12. ASSIGNMENT
13. CANCELLATION OF DESIGN
14. PIRACY
15. REMEDIES
16. PARIS CONVENTION
17. THE SALIENT FEATURES OF THE DESIGN
ACT, 2000
18. DESIGN ACT 1911 AND 2000 : A
COMPARISON
19. DESIGN AMENDMENT RULES 2008
20. PROBLEMS WITH THE DESIGN LAW
REGIME IN INDIA
21. RECENT CASE LAWS
Design Rights, 2000 Page 3
 Intellectual Property Laws

INTRODUCTION
God gifted a wonderful thing called Brain to Man and Mother Nature endowed him with

the abundant physical and biological resources on the earth. Man started creating his own

world by application of his brain or mind and by utilization of these natural resources.

Man has also been bestowed with imagination and creativity. With his imagination and

creativity, he has been producing various articles or products for his needs, comfort and

convenience. In the earlier era, the creations and inventions by him fell in a public

domain. These were the common properties. Anybody could use and copy these creations

and inventions without any restriction, reservation or payment. However, with the

passage of time, the importance and value of these creations was realized. The

commercial aspect started playing a significant roll in these creations. By end of

Twentieth Century, the things created and invented by the human mind were recognized

as an intellectual property of the owner .

Science and technology started boosting up in the beginning of 20th century, and the urge

to provide more reliable judicial system came in place for better protection of this field

and for the protection of the industrial designs. The steps were required to be taken to

promote more and more development in design industry by providing protection under

registered design. Though it was very essential to protect the design only to the extent it

was required and not any more than that and to allow use of available design for free too.

The current Act is in line with the TRIPS agreement and therefore line with globalisation

of trade and commerce.

Design Rights, 2000 Page 4

 Intellectual Property Laws

The Industrial product basically includes two factors, i.e. artistic work and functioning

part of the product. Though in Design Act only artistic work is covered and not

functioning part of the product, though the artistic work should be unique and not usual.

For example, table with for legs and top would not be considered as design, but the table

with unique top and unique style of bottom can be registered.

Day by day industrial design becoming daily part of the life of the consumer by catching

consumers eyes through unique designs. For the same reason, it has become essential to

provide protection to such industrial designs.

The expression "Design' means only the features of shape, configuration, pattern or

ornament applied to any article by any industrial process or means whether manual,

mechanical or chemical, separate or combined, which in the finished article appeal to and

are judged solely by the eye. The design means the features applied to an article and not

the article itself. The features are conceived in the author's intellect who give those ideas

conceived by him a material (visual) form as a pictorial illustration, or as a specimen,

prototype, or model. By registration under the Act, the features are protected as design.

The protection is given for independently created industrial designs that are new or

original, for example, the distinctive shape of a coke bottle or a pen or a textile design.

The protection of design is for a maximum period of fifteen years.1

Industrial designs in India are protected under the Designs Act, 2000 (“Designs Act”),

which replaced the Designs Act, 1911. The Designs Act has been in effect since May 11,

1
The Designs Act, 2000, Gazette of India, Extraordinary part H-Section I, 2002

Design Rights, 2000 Page 5

 Intellectual Property Laws

2001. The Designs Rules, 2001 have been framed under the Designs Act. The Designs

Act incorporates the minimum standards for the protection of industrial designs, in

accordance with the TRIPS agreement. It provides for the introduction of an international

system of classification, as per the Locarno Classification.

What is an “article” under the Act?

Under this legislation, an “article” is any manufactured object. The object may be made

of any substance, artificial or a mixture of artificial and natural.

An article should include any part that is capable of being made and sold separately. The

terms ‘pattern’ and ‘ornament’ refer to decorative elements applied to an article, such as

an ornamental cap of a bottle, like in perfumes. ‘Shape’ and ‘configuration’, have a direct

link to the article’s structure, such as the distinctive shape of a Coca-Cola bottle.

Who can Apply for Registration of a Design?

Any person claiming to be the “proprietor of any new or original design” 2 not previously

published in any country and is not contrary to public order or morality can apply for the

registration of the design. The expressions “public order” or “morality” have not been

defined in the Designs Act. The term “original,” with respect to design, means a design

originating from the author of such a design and includes the cases that, although old in

themselves, are new in their application. Absolute novelty is now the criterion for

registration.

2
Per Section 2(j) of the Designs Act: ”proprietor of a new or original design”,

Design Rights, 2000 Page 6

 Intellectual Property Laws

What is the Meaning “Design” Within the Scope of the Designs Act?

As per the Designs Act, “design” means only the features of shape, configuration,

pattern, ornament or composition of lines or colours applied to any “article”76 whether in

two dimensional or three dimensional or in both forms, by any industrial process or

means, whether manual mechanical or chemical, separate or combined, which in the

finished article appeal to and are judged solely by the eye. However, “design” does not

include any mode or principle of construction, or anything which is in substance a mere

mechanical device, and does not include any trademark (as defined in section 2(1) (v) of

the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958), or property mark (as defined in section

479 of the Indian Penal Code), or any artistic work (as defined in Section 2 (c) of the

Copyright Act, 1957). In order to obtain registration under the Designs Act, the design

must be applied to an article. In other words, a mere painting of a natural scene or its

presentation on paper is not entitled for registration under the Designs Act.

What is the Process of Registration?

The process of registration of a design under the Designs Act requires the following

steps:

• File an application for registration of design with the prescribed fee with the

Controller of Patents and Designs. Photographs of the articles from all angles must

be filed along with the statement of novelty.

• Reply to the objections raised by the Controller.

Design Rights, 2000 Page 7

 Intellectual Property Laws

• Upon removal objections, the design is registered. When registered, a design is

deemed to have been registered as of the date of the application for registration.

• After registration, the particulars of the design are published.

• If the Controller rejects the application, the aggrieved person can appeal to the

High Court.

There is no opposition procedure prior to registration.

What can be registered under the Act?

In order to register a design, it must have the following features:

• It must be new and original.

• It must be capable of being made and sold as an individual item.

• It should not be in publicly domain prior to filing an application. Thus the design

should be private and unpublished.

• It should be explicitly distinguishable from already existing designs.

• It should not have any obscene or inappropriate content.

Term of protection

For any IPR protection, there is a time period for which that protection applies.

Design Rights, 2000 Page 8

 Intellectual Property Laws

For designs, this term of protection is 10 years from the date of registration of that

design. After 10 years, the protection can be extended for a period of 5 years. Once this

period is complete the design falls in public domain and may be used unrestricted by

anyone.

All registered designs are open for cancellation even after the registration has been

granted on the grounds that it does not qualify as a design or that it does not fulfill the

criteria for protection under the Act.

Protection from infringement

Like trademarks, designs too are also susceptible to infringement mostly along the lines

of passing off. It is an illegal act to make use of a registered design, or a fraudulent or

obvious imitation of a registered design, without authorization from the registered owner

of such design.

In case of such an infringement, the registered owner may file a suit to recover a nominal

sum as damages from the infringer, and also ask that the infringement stop taking place.

In order to ascertain infringement, the Court or any adjudicatory body need not directly

compare the two articles, but look at them from the point of view of the average customer

and see if the two are causing an obvious confusion in the minds of the consumer.

Design Rights, 2000 Page 9

 Intellectual Property Laws

Notable examples of “designs” in India

Troikaa Pharmaceuticals, a pharma company has protected its “D” shaped tablet

DYNAPAR by registering the shape and colour of the tablet under the Design Act. it has

also successfully sued other companies for copying the said design.

Mattel lost out on protecting the design of their Scrabble board as the design was already

in public domain prior to filing an application.

Whirlpool successfully registered their distinctively shaped washing machine and

even won a lawsuit against Videocon for infringing it.

What are the Rights Conferred by Registration?

Registration of a design confers upon the registered proprietor a “copyright” with respect

to the design. Under the Designs Act, the word “copyright” refers to the exclusive right to

Design Rights, 2000 Page 10

 Intellectual Property Laws

apply the design to any article in any class in which the design has been registered. The

first term of registration is ten years after which it can be renewed for an additional five-

year period.

Assignment

When a person becomes entitled by assignment, transmission, or other operation of law

to the copyright of a registered design, a record of the title must be registered by an

application to the Controller for the same, accompanied by the prescribed fee and proof

of title.

When a person becomes entitled to any right in the registered design either by way of a

mortgage, a license, or otherwise, an application in the prescribed form must be made to

the Controller to register his title.

Cancellation of Design

Any person interested may present a petition for a cancellation of the design registration

at any time after the registration, on the following grounds: that the design has been

previously registered in India; that it has been published in India or in any other country

prior to the registration date; that the design is not a new or original design; that the

design is not registrable under the Designs Act or that it is not a design as defined under

Section 2(d) of the Designs Act. An appeal from any order by the Controller can be filed

with the High Court.

Design Rights, 2000 Page 11

 Intellectual Property Laws

Section 15 of the Copyright Act, 1957 states that the copyright in any design ,which is

capable of being registered under the Designs Act, but is not, will lose its copyright as

soon as the design has been reproduced 50 times by an industrial process by either the

owner of the copyright or his licensee.

Piracy

Section 22 of the Designs Act lists the different acts that amount to piracy of the

registered design, including:

1) any application of the registered design for the purpose of sale during the existence of

the copyright in the design without a license or the express consent of the registered

proprietor;

2) or the importation for sale without the consent of the registered proprietor of any

article belonging to the class in which the design has been registered and having applied

to it the design or any fraudulent or obvious imitation; or,

3) knowing that the design, or a fraudulent or obvious imitation has been applied to any

article in any class of articles in which the design is registered, published, or exposed for

sale, without the consent of the registered proprietor of such an article.

Any grounds on which the design can be cancelled can also be used as a defense in an

infringement action.

Design Rights, 2000 Page 12

 Intellectual Property Laws

Remedies

The Designs Act provides for civil remedies in cases of infringement of copyright in a

design, but does not provide for criminal actions. The civil remedies available in such

cases are injunctions, damages, compensation, or delivery-up of the infringing articles.

Paris Convention
Reciprocity for the purpose of claiming priority is now allowed from the applications

originating from the Paris Convention countries

The salient features of the Design Act, 2000 can be drawn as follows:

1. definition of the terms “article”, “design” has been given vide scope.

2. the scope is given to the term “prior publication”.

3. Introduction of provision for delegation of powers of the Controller to other

officers and stipulating statutory duties of examiners.

4. Provision of identification of non-registrable designs.

5. Provision for substitution of applicant before registration of a design.

6. Substitution of Indian classification by internationally followed system of

classification.

7. Provision for inclusion of a register to be maintained on computer as a Register of

Designs.

Design Rights, 2000 Page 13

 Intellectual Property Laws

8. Provision for restoration of lapsed designs.

9. Provisions for appeal against orders of the Controller before the High Court

instead of Central Government.

10. Revoking of period of secrecy of two years of a registered design.

11. Providing for compulsory registration of any document for transfer of right in the

registered design.

12. Introduction of additional grounds in cancellation proceedings and provision for

initiating the cancellation proceedings before the Controller in place of High

Court.

13. Enhancement of quantum of penalty imposed for infringement of a registered

design.

14. Provision for grounds of cancellation to be taken as defence in the infringement

proceedings to be in any court not below the Court of District Judge.

15. Enhancing initial period of registration from 5 to 10 years, to be followed by a

further extension of five years.

16. Provision for allowance of priority to other convention countries and countries

belonging to the group of countries or inter-governmental organizations apart from

United Kingdom and other Commonwealth Countries.

Design Rights, 2000 Page 14

 Intellectual Property Laws

17. Provision for avoidance of certain restrictive conditions for the control of

anticompetitive practices in contractual licenses.

Design Act 1911 and 2000 : A Comparison

The Designs Act, 2000 which came into effect from May 11, 2001 replacing the earlier

Designs Act, 1911.

1. International classification based upon Locarno classification has been adopted

wherein the classification is based on articles -the subject matter of design. Under the

previous law a 'Design' was classified on the basis of the material of which the article was

made.

2. Under new law, a Design registration can now be obtained for new or original features

of shape, configuration pattern, ornamentation or composition of lines or colours as

applied to an article, whether in 2 or 3 dimensions or both

3. A concept of "absolute novelty" has been introduced whereby a 'novelty' would now be

judged based on prior publication of an article not only in India but also in other

countries. Under the previous law, the position was ambiguous.

4. A Design registration has been brought within the domain of the public records right

from the date it is physically placed on the Register. Any member of public can take

inspection of the records and obtain a certified copy of the entry. In the previous Act,

Design Rights, 2000 Page 15

 Intellectual Property Laws

there was a 2-year confidential period -post registration -which prohibited taking

inspection/certified copy of any entry in the records.

5. A Design registration would be valid for 10 years (from the date of registration which

is also the date of application) renewable for a further period of 5 years

6. Under the previous law the validation period was 5 years which was extendable for 2

terms of 5 years each.

7. A Design registration can be restored within a year from its last date of expiry. Under

the previous law, no provision relating to restoration upon expiration of the Design

registration was provided.

8. Cancellation of a Design registration under the new law is possible only before the

Controller and there are a couple of additional grounds which have been recognized:-

9. The subject matter of Design not registerable under the Act

• The subject matter does not qualify as a 'Design' under the Act.

• The subject matter does not qualify as a 'Design' under the Act

Under the previous Act, the cancellation was provided for before the Controller within 12

months from registration on limited grounds and in the High Court within 12 months or

thereafter.

Design Rights, 2000 Page 16

 Intellectual Property Laws

Design Amendment Rules 2008

Pursuant to section 353 of the Building Act 2004, the Minister for Building and

Construction makes the following rules:

Title

• These rules are the Licensed Building Practitioners Amendment Rules 2008.

Commencement

• These rules come into force on 1 November 2008.

Principal rules amended

• These rules amend the Licensed Building Practitioners Rules 2007.

Schedule 1 amended

• Schedule 1 is amended by omitting competency 1 from the licensing classes of site

1, site 2, site 3, and carpentry and substituting the following competency:

"Competency 1: Demonstrate knowledge of the regulatory environment of the

building construction industry"

Design Rights, 2000 Page 17

 Intellectual Property Laws

• Schedule 1 is amended by omitting competency 2 from the licensing class of

carpentry and substituting the following competency: "Competency 2:

Demonstrate knowledge of current building and trade practice"

• Schedule 1 is amended by adding the licensing classes competencies like roofing,

external Plastering, bricklaying and Block laying.

Problems with the design law regime in India

Procedurally, applying for design protection is the easiest among other IP protection, the

use of this protection by companies and individuals is relatively less than that of

trademarks, copyrights and patents.

One of the reasons why design is so infrequently protected is because in many industries

such as jewelry and shoes, the designs change rapidly to keep up with consumer trends.

The requirement that prior to registration a design cannot be in public domain thus cannot

be met by most of these industries.

Artistic works such as designs of dresses by fashion designers cannot be given protection

under the Design Act, and most fashion designers prefer copyright protection in any case.

Another problem that the design protection regime faces is the term of protection. 15

years is too short a time. A company/individual would rather resort to trademark or

copyright protection depending on the article in question, to get a longer term of

protection.

Design Rights, 2000 Page 18

 Intellectual Property Laws

In case an article is original and can be protected by both design and copyright, the

overlap between the Copyright Act and the Design Act is not allowed, hence mostly the

Copyright Act is chosen to get a better term of protection.

In the United States and the United Kingdom, and various other places as well,

unregistered designs are allowed to be out in public for a limited time so that they can be

commercially exploited while the registration application is being processed. Many

possible changes can be undertaken in the Indian law in the near future.

Recent Case Laws

a) Aparia Tools Limited v. Ambica Overseas and Anr

In the above case, the plaintiffs have filed a suit claiming perpetual injunction

restraining the defendants from applying or causing to be applied in relation to

wrenches and pliers or any other goods contained in class 01 of the Designs Act 1911(

now repealed and substituted by the designs act 2000) which is identical or

deceptively similar to or a fraudulent imitation of the plaintiffs registered designs. In

March 1994, the plaintiff conceived a novel design of an adjustable Wrench. With a

view to protect the unique design and novelty of this product, an application was

made for registration of the same on or about 28th March 1994 and registration was

accepted.In1998 the plaintiff conceived and developed a Plier with a unique design.

With a view to protect this design, the plaintiff made an application on 5th January

1999 and that application was accepted. Hence by virtue of these registration
Design Rights, 2000 Page 19
 Intellectual Property Laws

certificates, the plaintiff acquired status as registered proprietor of the copyright in the

said designs.

In May 2003 the plaintiff learnt that first defendant was manufacturing and selling,

through defendant No. 2, in Mumbai, adjustable Wrench which was a fraudulent and

obvious imitation of the plaintiff's registered design.

Thus, the first defendant had committed and continues to commit infringement and

piracy of the plaintiff's registered designs.

The Designs Act as originally enacted and now amended, has enlarged the scope of

definition of terms "Article" and "Design". It has introduced the definition of the term

"Original". The term "Original" as defined in Section 2(g) reads thus:

"(g) 'original', in relation to a design, means originating from the author of such

design and includes the cases which though old in themselves yet are new in their

application."

'Article' means any article of manufacture and any substance, artificial, or partly

artificial and partly natural; and includes any part of an article capable of being made

and sold separately."

The defendants contended that there is nothing novel and the articles with their shapes

and designs are part of common trade. It may be true that there are several

manufacturers of these articles. However, the uniqueness insofar as adjustable

Design Rights, 2000 Page 20

 Intellectual Property Laws

Wrenches in the plaintiffs design is the scale mark. The defendants have contended

that plaintiffs are not proprietors of new or original design and the design registered is

pre-existing common type. Defendants have submitted that the plaintiffs are not aware

of hard realities about hand tool manufacturers and the plaintiffs should not, because

of money power; attempt to suffocate genuine competition in business. The court

considering the above circumstances held that since the plaintiffs had failed to make

out a prima facie case, the motion for injunction was dismissed.

B) Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Healthcare Gmbh and Co. Kg v. Amigo Brushes

Private Limited and Anr. (2004, 14 ILD 357Del)

In the above case the plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction for restraining the

defendant from manufacturing and selling offending toothbrushes, which infringed

the registered design of the plaintiff or which were fraudulent or obvious imitation. It

was alleged that plaintiff was a company organized under the laws of Germany. It was

engaged in a variety of business in the healthcare field, especially in the design and

sale of toothbrushes. The suit is filed in respect of design of toothbrushes, which

comprises a distinctive aesthetic toothbrush in respect of which the plaintiff had

obtained a design registration.

By virtue of said design registration and Section 48(5) of the Designs Act, 2000, the

plaintiff has the copyright in the design for an initial period of 5 years from the date of

the registration and this period is extendable by two successive periods of 5 years

Design Rights, 2000 Page 21

 Intellectual Property Laws

each. Plaintiff has also obtained corresponding design registrations of this toothbrush

model in several parts of the world. Recently, the plaintiff came to know that

defendant has recently commenced sale of toothbrushes under the brand name

"Pepsodent Cushion", which is a fraudulent and obvious imitation of the plaintiff's

design. The entire controversy centers around the design of the handle grip part of the

toothbrush used for gripping the toothbrush while in use. The plaintiff claims that the

design of its handle is novel and original and has been registered. In a suit for

injunction filed against the defendants, the Delhi High Court held that the tooth

brushes mainly have 2 components viz., the plastic handle and the bristles. The handle

itself has 3 sub components which are (a) the head (b) the neck (c) the handle grip.

While holding that the handle of the tooth brush could not be detached from other

components and sold out separately, the court dismissed an application for

interlocutory injunction against the defendants on the grounds that the handle (grip) of

the toothbrush detached from its other components is incapable of being registered as

a design, therefore the question of piracy of the plaintiff's toothbrush's design under

section 22 of the Designs Act 2000 could not arise. The court held that the similarity

of toothbrushes of the plaintiff and the defendant cannot be judged simply on looking

at the tail of the handle i.e. the grip portion.

C) Rotela Auto Components (P) Ltd. & Anr. v. Jaspal Singh & Ors. (2002 {24} PTC

449 Del)

Design Rights, 2000 Page 22

 Intellectual Property Laws

In the above case it was held that Design was a conception, suggestion or an idea of a

shape and not an article. If it has already been anticipated, it is not new or original. If it

has been pre-published, it cannot claim protection as publication before registration

defeats the proprietors rights to protect under the Designs Act, 2000.Unless the design is

new and original, registration cannot be effective. In the present case since the design has

been pre-published, it cannot claim protection. The registration of the design is of recent

date , but since the design has been published earlier, the ground of defence mentioned in

section 19 of the designs act 2000 can be taken by the defendants, pursuant to sub-section

(3) of section 22 of the act. Therefore no injunction can be granted as there is a serious

dispute as to the validity of the design to be tried in the suit. The injunction order granted

earlier has also been vacated.

Design Rights, 2000 Page 23