Guidance on responding to the UK government Design Protection Survey 

 
The intellectual property (IP) system for protecting designs is complex and we know it can be difficult for designers to understand how to protect their designs. We want to make it easier to access and use the system and to enforce IP rights. 
The government is reviewing the way designs are protected and will consult on proposed changes later in the year. Ahead of that we have published a Design Protection Survey on which principles should shape the system.

We want to hear your views on them so that your responses can inform what we ask in the consultation. 

This document is a guide to the Design Protection Survey that is intended to help you as you complete it. 

Overarching principles  

 
Users have previously told us that they value the speed and low cost of design registration in the UK. Others have said that they like the choice of different types of protection available. We want to know what matters to designers now. 

We have identified five principles which we think are relevant to the design protection system.  We want to understand what designers, users and other interested parties think about them.  
The five principles

• Cost
• Validity
• Speed
• Choice
• Simplicity

1. Cost - the system should offer value for money 

• There are fees for the registration and renewal of registered designs
• Some costs occur for both registered and unregistered designs e.g. cost of enforcement, administrative costs, legal costs
• Third parties may have to pay to challenge rights they think shouldn’t have been registered, or to check the existence of others’ rights to avoid infringing 
• A low-cost system might mean accepting a lower level of validity 
 
2. Validity – the system should provide appropriate level of validity and clarity about existence of IP rights 

• Designs are only valid if they are new and not too similar to previous designs
• No checks are currently carried out by the Intellectual Property Office on the validity of designs
• A high presumption of validity may mean accepting a higher cost to obtain rights and a longer time for them to be registered
• What presumption of validity do users, and third parties want in the system? 

3. Speed– design protection should be quick to obtain and enforce

• A system which registers designs quickly is likely to have a lower presumption of validity
• A system with a higher presumption of validity is likely to take longer to register designs
• Some designers may prefer a choice in relation to speed of processing. 
 
4. Choice - the system should provide choice for designers.

• Designs can currently be protected in several different ways - registered designs, two different types of unregistered designs and by copyright if the requirements are met
• There also choices for enforcement – different courts, tribunal options and alternative dispute resolution
• The choice currently available means the system can be complicated for designers to understand how best to protect their designs. However, availability of different rights can be useful when enforcing a right, or defending a challenge

5. Simplicity principle – the system should be as simple as possible 

• A simple system would be more understandable to designers and non-IP experts
• Simplifying the system might reduce choice for users

There are interactions and frictions between the principles and it is not possible to have a system which meets all of them. We want to know which of these principles is most important to you and why.  

Have your say here

What should be protected as a design? 
We also want to know what you think should be protected as a design. 
The term “design” has a narrower definition in intellectual property law than in everyday language. IP protects the visual appearance of a product, or elements of a product. Currently a design can only be protected if it is visible in normal use, so for example the components under a car bonnet cannot be protected as designs. 
We would like to know whether users think that the scope of what can be protected meets the needs of designers, consumers and society.  

Let us know what you think here: