COPYRIGHT

“DESIGNS”

Functional / Purely Designs with

utilitarian artistic works eye-appeal & capable of
Industrial application

Patents Copyright Designs

Act, 1970 Act, 1957 Act, 2000
 Definition of copyright
• “The exclusive right given by law for a
certain term of years to an author,
composer etc. to print, publish and sell
copies of his original work.”
Oxford English Dictionary
 COPYRIGHT - A GLOBAL
RIGHT
• Right exists on creation
• No registration is needed
• Protectable in all
Convention countries.
• Almost 150 countries are
covered.
• Reciprocal protection in all
countries
 What is Copyright

 Grants authors, composers, and other creators

legal protection for their literary and artistic
creations (‘works’)

 Gives ‘bundle’ of exclusive rights, which allow

owners to control the use of their original works in
number of ways and to be remunerated

 Also provides ‘moral rights’ which protect the

author’s reputation and integrity.
 Copyright Works

Films Literary Dramatic

Photographic

Music
Artistic
 COPYRIGHT
– Categories of
copyrighted works
• literary
• artistic
• musical
• Dramatic
• Cinematograph
films
• Sound Recordings
• Broadcaster’s rights
• Performer’s Rights
 “ARTISTIC WORKS”

• A painting, sculpture,
drawing, engraving,
….whether or not
possessing artistic
quality

• Any other work of

“artistic
craftsmanship”
 Examples of some works
• Choreography:
– art of arranging designing of ballet or
stage dance in symbolic language.
– It is a form of dramatic work.
– In order to qualify for the copyright
protection it must be reduced into
writing.
 Examples of some works
• Ballet:
– The elements of ballet are the music, the
story, the choreography, the scenery,
and the costumes.
– A composite work.
– Such work could be the subject matter
of copyright.
 • Painting :
– An artistic work whether or not it posses any
artistic quality .
– To be entitled to copyright protection a painting
must be original i.e. it should originate from the
painter and not a mere copy of another painting.
– A painting must be on a surface of some kind.
– Facial make-up as such, however idiosyncratic it
must be an idea,
– cannot possibly be a painting for the purpose of
copyright act.
• Sculpture:
– Included in the definition of artistic work
– the work of sculpture includes casts and models.
– means the art, act, process of carving cutting,
hewing, molding or constructing materials into
statutes , ornaments, figures
– The act, art, process of producing figures or groups
in plastic or hard materials.
– The art of sculpture is the branch of the visual arts
that is especially concerned with the creation of
expressive form in three dimensions.
– A sculpture should in some way express in three
dimensional form an idea of the sculptor.
 What are Related rights ?
 “ Related rights ” refer to the category of rights
granted to performers , phonogram producers
and broadcasters.
 Related rights are also called as “ neighbouring
rights “
 While copyright protects the work of the authors
themselves , related rights are granted to certain
categories of people or businesses that play an
important role in performing , communicating
or disseminating work to the public that may or
may not be protected by copyright .
• 3 kinds of “related rights” :
 Right of performers ( eg: actors and
musicians ) in their performances .
 Right of producers of sound recordings in
their recordings .
 Right of broadcasting organizations in
their radio and television programs .
 An example :
In case of a song :
• Copyright protects the music of the composer
and words of the author ..
• Related rights would apply to :
• Performances of the musicians and singers who
perform the song .
• Sound recording of the producer in which the
song is included .
• Broadcast program of the organization that
produces and broadcasts the program
containing the song .
 OBJECTIVE OF COPYRIGHT
• To encourage authors, composers and
artists to create original works by
rewarding them with monopoly rights
over their work for a limited period of
time.
Relevance of Copyright and related
right to business
• Control commercial exploitation of
original works .
• Generate income
• Raise funds
• Take action against infringers.
 What is not protected under
copyright ?
• Ideas or concepts
• Facts or information
• Names , titles , slogans and other short
phrases
• Official government works
• Works of applied art
 A BUNDLE OF RIGHTS
• Economic Rights
– Reproduce or make copies
– Artistic Works-3D to 2D and vice-versa
– Issue copies- sell, distribute, etc .
– Communication to public
– Adapt
– Assign/License
• Moral rights
– Right of acknowledgement
– Right to object against mutilation /distortion of work
 OWNERSHIP

• Ordinarily the Artist/author;

• Employer;

• Written Agreement;

• Commissioned Work
 TERM OF COPYRIGHT
• The term of copyright
– for literary, dramatic musical or artistic work is
lifetime of author + 60 years .
– for anonymous or pseudonymous work is 60 years
from the date of publishing .
– for a photograph, sound recording,
cinematographic film and government work is 60
years from date of publishing of the work .
• Worldwide - BERNE Convention;
• Registration not compulsory though
advisable;
Types of copyright in one work

BOOKS:
1. Rights of the author
2. Rights of the publisher
in India and abroad
3. Rights of a person
publishing the book on
CD Rom/multimedia
format
4. Rights on the Internet
Types of copyright in one work

MUSIC:
1. Right of lyricist
2. Music director
3. Singer
4. Orchestra
5. Music company
6. Version
recordings
Types of copyright in one work

• Machinery
This can be sub-matter of
patent & copyright. But
drawings of machinery
falls in copyright.
Escorts Construction case.
Types of copyright in one work

• PEPSI CAN
1. Copyright in the
packaging, colours etc.
2. Trade mark in Pepsi
3. Copyright in circular
device
4. Copyright in manner of
writing Pepsi
Adaptations of various works

• MUSIC -- SONGS
• Original album
• New albums
• Remixes
• Version Recordings
• Pop versions
• DJ versions
Adaptations of various works
• STORY
• PUBLISHED IN A
BOOK
• STORY ENACTED
IN A DRAMA
• TRANSLATION
• TELE-SERIAL
• CINEMATOGRAPH
FILM
Adaptations of various works
• STORY
• OPERA/BALLET
• MUSICAL VERSION
• COMPILATION
Each of the above works,
once created have a
separate, new copyright,
protectable as original
works.
Adaptations of various works
• POEMS
• SONGS
• SOUND
RECORDINGS
• PERFORMANCES
• POETRY BOOKS
• COMPILATIONS OF
POETRY, including
expert comments
Adaptations of various works
• PAINTINGS
• Licensing as covers
for books
• Licensing on stamps
• Create new versions
by changing the sizes
of the painting
• Calendars
• Diaries etc.,
INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT
• What constitutes infringement?
– Doing or authorizing to do any of the
following acts without the consent or
license of owner of copyright:
• Reproduce the work including its storage by
any electronic means
• Issue copies to the public
• Perform/Communicate the work to public
• Make translation of the work
• Make adaptation of the work
• To make any cinematograph film or sound
recording in respect of the work.
INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT
• make infringing copies of work for sale,
hire or display or offer for sale or hire
• import infringing copies in India
 Exceptions-fair use
• Section 52 of the Copyright Act enlists acts
which do not constitute infringement, viz.
– Fair dealing for the purpose of private use,
including research and criticism or review of the
work.
– Fair dealing for the purpose of reporting current
events in a newspaper, etc.
– reproduction for the purpose of judicial proceeding
or report of judicial proceeding.
 Exceptions-fair use
– Making of temporary or back-up copies to
provide against destruction or damage
– Observation, study or testing of
functioning of the computer programme
– making of copies of software from a legal
copy for non-commercial personal use
 Fair Dealing

• Fair dealing is permitted for the

purposes of
– private study or research ,
– criticism or
– review or
– the reporting of current events.
 Fair Dealing or Permitted Acts
• SEC 52(1)(o) : Making a maximum of 3 copies for the
use of a public library.

• Sec 52(1)(c): Reproduction for judicial proceedings or

for the purpose of a report of a judicial proceeding.
‘Judicial proceedings’ are defined as including
proceedings before any court, tribunal, or person
having authority to decide any matter affecting a
person’s legal rights or liabilities.

• SEC 52 (1)(m) : Reproduction in newspaper and

magazine of the article of the current economic,
political, social or religious topic in certain situation.
 Fair Dealing or Permitted Acts
• SEC 52(1)(p): Reproduction of unpublished work kept
in a museum or library for the purpose of research or
study.

• Sec 52(1)(d) : Reproduction in any work prepared for

the exclusive use of members of any legislature or
publication of a translation of acts of legislature or
rules
 Fair Dealing or Permitted Acts
• Sec 52(1)(h) : Reproduction by a teacher or a
pupil in the course of instruction, or as part of a
question paper or in answers to such questions.

e.g. It seems that the teacher may copy onto a

blackboard a substantial part of a literary work,
and pupil may copy it down. The teacher may
however not photocopy the same material for
the use by students in absence of a licensing
agreement.
 Fair Dealing or Permitted Acts
• SEC 52(1)(f): Reading and recitation in public of extracts
(literary or dramatic).

• SEC 52 (1)(g) : Publication in collection for the use of

educational institution in certain circumstances.
• Sec 52(1)(I) : Performance in course of activities of
educational institutions in certain circumstances.

WORK OF ARCHITECTURE:
• SEC 52(1)(s) :The making or publishing of a painting
,drawing, engraving or photograph of a work of
architecture does not constitute infringement.
 Fair Dealing or Permitted Acts
WORK OF ARTISTIC CRAFTSMANSHIP:
• SEC 52(1)(t): The making or publishing of a
painting, drawing, engraving, or photograph
of a sculpture, or other artistic work falling
under the category of a work of artistic
craftsmanship if the work is permanently
situate in a public place or any premises to
which the public has access will not
constitute infringement.
 Fair Dealing or Permitted Acts
AUTHOR’S RIGHT TO USE MOULD, CAST etc. OF
WORK:

• SEC 52 (1)(v): The use by the author of an artistic work,

where the author of such work is not the owner of the
copyright therein, of any mould, cast, sketch, plan, model
or study made by him for the purpose of the work

– Provided that he does not thereby repeat or imitate the

main design of the work
 Fair Dealing or Permitted Acts

• SEC 52(2) The exceptions to infringement listed

under s. 52(1) in relation to literary, or dramatic,
musical artistic work will apply also in relation
to any translation or adaptation of such work
Remedies
• Civil remedy
A suit for infringement of
copyright can lie in the District
Court or in a High Court of
Original Jurisdiction.
Reliefs to be claimed:
1. Injunction coupled
2. Rendition of accounts,
damages
3. Delivery Up
Remedies contd
• Criminal:
Copyright infringement is a cognisable
offence. A criminal complaint can be
filed either before the police or a
Magistrate and search & seizure orders
can be obtained.
 Pros & Cons of Civil remedies
PROS CONS
• Proper judicial • Delays - Trial, Appeal,
determination of rights Supreme Court
• Likelihood of earning • Damages not usually
damages awarded
• Less subject to challenge • No severe punishment
• Commissioner’s seizure for violation of rights
orders are more respected
 Pros & Cons-Criminal remedies
PROS CONS
• Quick remedy • Chances of seizure
• Greater possibility of of goods may be
curbing violation less as there can be
quickly because of a leakage
fear of being arrested • Difficulty in
in a criminal case coordinating with
police authorities
 CRIMINAL REMEDIES

Section 63 of the Copyright Act,1957 defines

offence of infringement of copyright.

Infringement of copyright is a cognizable offence

punishable with imprisonment upto 3 years and
fine upto 2 lakh rupees
 How to Register ?

Particulars needed for registration:

1.Name of author
2.Date of publication
3.Whether assignments are obtained
4.If it is an artistic work, then no-
objection from Trade Marks Registry
Advantages of registration:
1. Documentation comes in place in terms of
assignments/no-objections from authors
2. Evidence of date when the work was created
3. Prima facie evidence of particulars
4. Easier to take action especially criminal action
where police are convinced with copyright
certificate. (re:software, music)
OVERLAP OF DESIGN,
COPYRIGHT &
TRADE MARK
 Various means to protect the original
creation … which one to choose ??
• Understand the nature of creation .
• Based on the same , consult IP advisors and select the
best protection .
• Trademarks .. Provides exclusivity over signs .
• Industrial designs .. Exclusivity over the ornamental or
aesthetic feature of a product .
• Patents .. Protect inventions that are novel , follow
inventive stpes and industrial applicability .
• Trade secrets .. Confidential business information
• Unfair Competition .
 Copyright & Design
Design is for aesthetic appearance. Anything
functional is not registrable as a design

Copyright in a design comes to an end if the

work has industrial application and is
reproduced more than 50 times

Is there diff. between copyright in a design

and copyright in a drawing. Yes.
 THE COPYRIGHT/DESIGN OVERLAP

• Fashion design lies at the cusp between “creativity” and

“industrial manufacture”
• Great design has the quality of transforming “wearable
apparel” into “wearable art”
• Thus, the distinction made by law between “purely
artistic works” and works that have been
commercialized can be problematic in many cases
• There will be works that are both protectible under
copyright law as well as under designs law
• Indian law has tried to resolve this by the provision of
Section 15(2), Copyright Act, 1957
 SECTION 15(2), COPYRIGHT ACT, 1957

• Copyright does not subsist in design registered

under the Designs Act

• Design capable of being registered, but which

has not been so registered enjoys copyright
protection

• Copyright shall cease as soon as any article to

which the design has been applied more than
FIFTY TIMES by an industrial process
 Copyright & Designs Law
• Designs that are not commercialised (i.e., not
produced more than 50 times), enjoy full
copyright protection even if not registered as a
design

• It may be argued that a design that has been

commericalised, may be capable of protection
under Copyright Act on the basis of the
underlying artistic works (i.e., the sketches,
engravings, prototypes, etc.) though Section 15
(2) remains a bar
 Copyright & Designs Law

• Important to maintain documentation and

records at every stage of product design and
development as this may help in claiming
protection for a design under the Copyright Act

• If you think of getting into mass production of a

unique design, file a design application as that
would provide you stronger protection &
complete monopoly
 DESIGN Vs. COPYRIGHT
DESIGN COPYRIGHT
Need to register to Subsists inherently
claim protection

Has to be “NEW” No requirement for novelty

Maximum 15 years Life of author + 50 years

Only in respect of Is not goods specific

goods registered for
 Trade mark vs Copyright

Confusion is worse with Trade mark

definition being amended
Shape is also a trade mark – But articles
like dresses, sculpture etc., cannot come in
trade marks.
However commercial products have more
overlaps in protection.
Indian Cases
 Cases
Tahiliani Design Private Ltd. vs. Renu Tandon & Anr.
C.S. (OS) No. 2222 of 2008 – Before Hon’ble Delhi High Court
 Cases
Tahiliani Design Private Ltd. vs. Renu Tandon & Anr.
C.S. (OS) No. 2222 of 2008 – Before Hon’ble Delhi High Court
• Allegation that the Defendants’ garments were
copies of the garments designed and crafted by the
Plaintiff

• The said garments were supposed to be developed,

designed and crafted by the plaintiff as a part of their
collection for the year 2006

• The Hon’ble Delhi High Court vide order dated

21.10.2008 granted ex-parte ad-interim injunction
Tahiliani Design Private Ltd. vs. Renu Tandon & Anr.
C.S. (OS) No. 2222 of 2008 – Before Hon’ble Delhi High Court
• Defendant served notice.

• Application for vacation of stay moved claiming that both

designs are separate.

• The impugned prints are generic Jamawar Prints

• Matter is sub-judice – Referred to Mediation

Suneet Varma Design Pvt. Ltd. Vs Jas Kirat Singh Narula &
Anr. [2007 (34) PTC 81 (Del)]

• Allegation of infringement of
copyright as the defendant used the
dress in a movie which was worn by
an actress

• Importance of costumes worn by

actors and actresses in a film play
special role and serve purpose of
promotion of the movie

• Held that all kinds of clothes worn

by actors cannot be stated as Fair
Use permitted under sec 52 (1) (u).
Successful copyright infringement claims
Ritu Kumar’s cases

Ritika Limited v.
Ashwani Kumar

Ritika Limited v. Nina

Talukdar

Ritika Limited v.
Sajid Mobin
 Successful copyright infringement claims
Ritu Kumar’s cases

Ritika Limited v.
Ashwani Kumar

Ritika Limited v. Nina

Talukdar
Original Original
Ritika Limited v.
Sajid Mobin

Copy Copy
 Cases
Microfibres Inc vs. Girdhar and Co. and Ors. : 2006(32)
PTC 157 (Del)

• Case relating to design of upholstery

• Plaintiff claimed to have copyright in the
artistic work applied to upholstery design
• Did not have a registered design however
they claimed a copyright in the drawings
 Cases
Microfibres Inc vs. Girdhar and Co. and Ors. : 2006(32)
PTC 157 (Del)

• Question was whether without a registered design, the

plaintiff could protect the same and whether the copyright
was lost because of more than 50 reproduction of the said
upholstery fabric design
• The Court although upholding that the motives etc. of the
plaintiff was artistic and also holding that the defendants
had copied it, on a legal and technical argument that more
than 50 reproduction had been made, refused to grant
injunction
 Cases
1997(17) PTC 268: Baldev Singh vs. Shriram Footwear
• Plaintiff claimed an injunction on the ground that his
designs of shoe soles had distinctive shape and
configuration

• During the course of argument, it was revealed that

the plaintiff himself had copied designs from Bata
India Ltd.

• Thus Court had held that the plaintiff himself being a

pirater, no injunction can be granted in favour of the
plaintiff
 Cases
Dabur India Ltd. Vs. Rajesh Kumar & Ors 2008 (37) PTC
227
• Suit filed alleging infringement of design in respect of a bottle
which is being used by plaintiff for packing hair oil
• Court found plaintiff’s bottle to be common bottle used by
several other companies
• Bottles were held to be in use much prior to the registration
of the design of the plaintiff
• No peculiar feature of the bottle registered as a design and
the plaintiff had not pin pointed any novelty in the design of
the bottle
• Held that for validly of the registered design there must be
some novelty and originality in the design sought to be
protected and it must have not been pre-published
 Cases
Vikas Jain Vs. Aftab Ahmad And Ors, 2008 (37) PTC 288
(Del)
• Suit filed for the infringement as well as passing off of design
in Toy Scooter
• The defendant pleaded the prior publication of the design
• Another defense taken by the defendant was that the
defendant too was having the registration of the design
• Court held that there were various dissimilarities in the prior
published design
• The design of the defendant was identical to the design of
the plaintiff
• Hence the defendant is not protected even on account of the
registration having been obtained by it which admittedly is
the subsequent registration
 Cases
Faber Castell Vs. Pikpen - 2003 PTC 538

• Faber Castell “Textliner”.

• A dark green body
• Unique cap of same colour as
colour of ink
• Gold lettering on green body
Regd design.
Prior Publication could be
through prior documents or
some other prior user.
Injunction granted
 Cases
Samsonite Vs. Vijay Sales 1998 PTC 372
• Suitcases made by plaintiff
copied by defendant
• The entire range was copied
• Claim was based on
drawings & copyright
• No registered design
• No protection granted as it is
manufactured industrially
more than 50 times.
 Cases
Preeti Gupta Vs. Rajendra Prahladkar 2002 PTC 64

• Design of photo-frames
• Registered design
• Defendant no.2 was an
employee of plaintiff
• Injunction granted
protecting the copyright in
the design of photo-frames
Example of infringement of registered
design

• Birkin v. Pratt

• Lace pattern was

held to have been
infringed
International Cases
 YSL v. Ralph Lauren

• YSL was awarded

damages for Ralph
Lauren’s
infringement of the
design rights in YSL’s
design of its tuxedo
dress
RADELY GOWNS Ltd. v COSTAS SPYROU and BROKE v
SPINCERS DRESS DESIGN Ltd.(1975) FSR 455

• Plaintiff & defendant

manufacture ladies clothing.
• Copyright claimed in 3
stages of Manufacturing
Procedure viz.,
- design sketches,
- cutting patterns
- prototype garments
RADELY GOWNS Ltd. v COSTAS SPYROU and BROKE v
SPINCERS DRESS DESIGN Ltd.(1975) FSR 455

• Def argued
– Prototype is not work of
artis.crtms.
– No one author is involved
– Cutting patterns are
functional
– One of the sketches was
copied from earlier dress
– Dress could not reproduce
a sketch
– Stiffness was to be given
otherwise it is not a dress
– Delay
RADELY GOWNS Ltd. v COSTAS SPYROU and BROKE v
SPINCERS DRESS DESIGN Ltd.(1975) FSR 455

• Court Held:
– It is work of A.C
– Need not unite with one
author
– Dress can be a 3
dimensional reproduction of
a sketch
– Huge diff between the earlier
dress and new one, hence
plaintiff work is original
BRIGID FOLEY Ltd. v ELLOT (1982) RPC
433

It has been observed that if there is a direct

copying from a garment which one person has
designed and produced by himself, doing all the
cutting , stitching, and so on, there might be a
case for saying that there would be a breach of
doing that.
BERNSTEIN v SYDNEY MURRAY(1981) RPC
303

• The plaintiffs were owners of

copyright in certain sketches for
ladies’ garments in which the
garments were shown as worn by
ladies. They had displayed
garments made from such
sketches in fashion shows and
shop windows. Defendants have
copied the dresses produced from
plaintiff’s sketches. It was held that
this constituted infringement of
copyright in sketches.
•
BURKE and MARGOT BURKE Ltd. v
SPINCERS DRESS DESIGNS
(1936) CH D 400
• The plaintiff’s alleged that
defendants had infringed the
copyright in the sketch described
as “ frock being worn by a young
lady ” It was also alleged that
there was infringement of artistic
copyrights in dresses made up by
the plaintiff’s in accordance with
those sketches, which dress
themselves were said to be works
of artistic craftsmanship It was
held that thee was no infringement
of a sketch by a frock.
In MERLET v MOTHERCARE Ltd
(1986) RPC 115
• The plaintiff made a prototype
baby cape for her child.
• The cape was subsequently
manufactured by the second
plaintiff.
• The defendants copied the
plaintiff’s garments and made
baby cape in accordance with the
copy.
• The plaintiff claiming the
handmade prototype garment as
a work of craftsmanship it was
not a work of artistic
craftsmanship brought an action
for infringement of copyright.
In MERLET v MOTHERCARE Ltd
(1986) RPC 115
• It was held that though the
prototype was a work of
craftsmanship it was not a
work of artistic craftsmanship.
• It was held that in approaching
the question the garment has
to be considered by itself and
neither as worn nor as
containing a baby.
• No aesthetic satisfaction
unless worn on the baby
• Action was dismissed. An
appeal against infringement of
certain drawings was
dismissed.
KOMESAROFF v MICKLE
(1988) RPC 204

• A product called (moving

sand pictures) comprising
a mixture of liquid,
colored sands, and a
layer of air bubbles
encased within two glass
panels was held not a
work of artistic
craftsmanship.
• They are functional – not
regd design
 Cases
• MERCANDISING CORPORATION v
HARPBOND(1983) FSR 32 P, 32 (Facial
make-up was not held a painting within the
meaning of sec 3 of the U.K. copyright act.)
 Ford Motor Co.1993 RPC 399
• Vehicle parts are not subject matter of design because’ they have
no value in commerce except as part of a vehicle
• Mirrors, seats, etc., were capable of registration as substitution
was possible without affecting shape of the vehicle.
• The distinction that seems to have been drawn is that there are
several parts which are mostly hidden and never seen, such parts
cannot be registered as designs.
• However, parts and their circuits if in drawing form are artistic
works
George Hensher Ltd s. Restawile Upholstery
1975 RPC 31
• Upholstered chairs & settees.
• One prototype was evolved – chairs were copied from it
and sold
• Def. copied the chairs and hence the prototype
• Trial Court granted injunction. Appeal court dismissed
the injunction. HL refused protection
George Hensher Ltd s. Restawile Upholstery
1975 RPC 31
• Artistic craftsmanship need not necessarily mean
“work of art”.
• The product may be a commercial success but need
not be of Art craftsmanship
Merchandising Corpn Vs. Harpbond
1983 FSR 32

• Adam from the pop group Adam &

Ants
• New look for himself with Red-
Indian face markings
• Two red lines in grease paint, light
blue line in between, heart over
left eyebrow & a beauty spot
• Def. made a poster of it & made a
portrait & superimposed new look
over an old poster
• In infringement action court held
that this is not a painting and
hence not protectable.
Animal Fair Inc., Vs. Amfesco Inds
227 USPQ 817 (1985)
• Novelty slippers
• Resembles a bear’s foot or paw
• Slipper’s design features
separate from its utilitarian
features, incl. impractical width
of sole, shape of sole, profile of
slipper, toes which are
unrelated to function and
copyrightable.
• Injunction granted.
 Remember ..
• Be clear on the ownership of copyright

• Maintain documentation at every stage of

design & product development as it may help
you to claim copyright protection even if your
commercialised design is not registered.
• Get your work registered in the Copyright
Office- not necessary but advisable

• Copyright notice & name of author to be

mentioned wherever possible- label,
packaging, invoice…
• If you seriously contemplate getting
into mass production of a design,
put in an application for design
registration – gives you full
monopoly over the design
• Be clear on the ownership of the
design & spell it out in the contract,
when:
– Joint design efforts
– Use of people in the design
development process
– Designing for an entity
 CONCLUSION
Technological advancement made
the job of the creator easy
………it also made the job of the
copier easy.

Consciousness in IPR is the only way

to prevent the latter.