Lindley LJ said: ‘The Act is confined to designs applicable to manufactured articles, and to the application of designs to such articles. Again, the Act does not apply to the things to which design is applied; the Act applies to the design applied to them. The distinction is obvious enough when the design is for a pattern or ornament; but when, as in this case, the design is for the shape of a thing, the distinction is reduced to the difference between the shape of a thing and a thing of that shape . . A design applicable to a thing for its shape can only be applied to the thing by making it in that shape.’
Judges:
Lindley LJ
Citations:
(1896) 13 RPC 351, (1896) 2 Ch 38
Cited by:
Cited – Lucasfilm Ltd and Others v Ainsworth and Another CA 16-Dec-2009
The claimants had made several Star Wars films for which the defendants had designed various props items. The parties disputed ownership of the rights in the designs, and in articular of a stormtrooper helmet. The issues came down to whether the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.384434
