Designs

This subtopic provides an overview of design rights under EU.

The World Intellectual Property Office defines intellectual property (IP) as ‘creations of the mind, such as inventions; literary and artistic works; design; and symbols, names and images used in commerce’. Broadly, the aim of IP law is to cultivate an environment in which creativity and invention can flourish. Protection of IP rights means those that invest time and resource in creating and developing IP can reap benefit from their investment. By registering (where necessary), maintaining and enforcing IP rights, a rights holder can prevent people stealing or copying valuable assets.

The four most common IP rights are:

  1. copyright, databases and associated rights

  2. designs

  3. patents, and

  4. trade marks

This subtopic focuses on design rights. Design rights protect the shape, configuration or appearance of the whole or part of a product or article. A design may comprise three-dimensional features, such as the shape or surface of an article or two-dimensional features such as surface decoration, patterns or colour. To qualify for protection, a design

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest EU Law News

Automated decision-making and DSARs: right to access means a right to explainability (CK v Magistrat Der Stadt Wiendun & Bradstreet Austria GMBH)

Information Law analysis: The Court of Justice provided several clarifications around the scope of data subject access requests (DSARs) in the context of automated decision-making. The court held the determining factor for whether information constitutes ‘meaningful information about the logic involved’ under Article 15(1)(h) of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (EU GDPR) is whether the information enables the data subject to understand the logic involved in automated decision-making involving their personal data. The court also held disclosure by controllers should be underpinned by the principles of transparency, which requires information to be clear, accessible and intelligible, both in terms of content and form, from the perspective of data subjects. In the context of automated decision-making this doesn’t necessarily mean providing the exact algorithm, if it doesn’t help the data subject’s understanding of the ‘how’. The court confirmed DSARs do not mandate the disclosure of trade secrets, but this can only be decided by the relevant supervisory authority or competent court, after assessing all relevant information provided to them by a controller. The protection of trade secrets cannot be used as a blanket excuse by businesses to withhold certain information from individuals making a request under Article 15(1)(h) of the EU GDPR. Written by Marija Nonkovic, associate at Kemp IT Law LLP.

View EU Law by content type :

Popular documents