In a registered design claim, the line drawings included one or two small features (an opening catch and a rim around the edge), and the natural implication was that no other ornamentation was intended, a view supported by the fact that the plainness and transparency of the surface was subtly indicated by a few pairs of short lines suggesting the incidence of light on that surface.
Held: Jacob LJ said: ‘If an important feature of a design is no ornamentation, as Apple contended and was undisputed, the judge was right to say that a departure from no ornamentation would be taken into account by the informed user’.
Judges:
Longmore, Kitchin LJJ, Sir Robin Jacob
Citations:
[2012] EWCA Civ 1339, [2013] EMLR 10, [2013] ECDR 2, [2013} FSR 9
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
At PatC – Samsung Electronics (Uk) Ltd v Apple Inc PatC 9-Jul-2012
The court found that Samsung had not, in its tablet computers, infringed the registered design belonging to Apple, and granted a declaration accordingly. . .
Cited by:
Cited – PMS International Group Plc v Magmatic Ltd SC 9-Mar-2016
Overall Impression of Design is a Judgment
The respondent had alleged infringement of its registered design in the ‘Trunki’, a ride-on children’s suitcase. At first instance, the judge had held that the surface decorations were to be ignored. On appeal it had been held that the judge had . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 22-Mar-2021
The defendant had been found to be in breach of copyright, and of misuse of private information. The court now considered the form of orders required to complete the judgment.
Held: The statement to be published by the defendant was not to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 07 October 2022; Ref: scu.464957