News Center

Perspective | The Difference Between "Design Features" and "Design Concepts" in the Authorization and Confirmation of Appearance Design Patents

Published:

2024-12-31

In the process of granting and confirming design patents, the issue of combining design features in existing designs often arises. At this point, how to delineate design features and how to combine them often becomes one of the focal points of examination. In the process of declaring a patent invalid, the requester often combines elements such as "lines," "geometric shapes," and "positional relationships" from the prior art as design features to challenge the patent's eligibility. However, these elements are often considered as "design concepts" and cannot be combined with design features. This article aims to analyze this issue.

In the process of granting and confirming design patents, issues often arise regarding the combination of design features in existing designs. At this point, how to delineate design features and how to combine them often becomes one of the focal points of examination. In the process of declaring a patent invalid, the requester often combines "lines", "geometric shapes", "positional relationships", etc., from the prior art as design features to challenge the patent's eligibility. However, the aforementioned elements are often considered "design concepts" and cannot be combined with design features. This article aims to analyze this issue.

1. One of the conditions for granting design patents: obvious distinction

According to the provisions of Article 23, Paragraph 2 of the Patent Law, the granted design patent should have obvious distinctions compared to existing designs or combinations of existing design features. The lack of obvious distinction between the patent in question and existing designs or combinations of existing design features refers to the following situations: (1) The patent in question does not have obvious distinctions compared to existing designs of the same or similar types of products; (2) The patent in question is derived from existing designs, with the design features being the same or only slightly different, and the specific method of derivation is suggested in existing designs of the same or similar types of products; (3) The patent in question is obtained from the combination of existing designs or existing design features, where the corresponding design parts of the existing designs are the same or only slightly different from the patent in question, and the specific combination method is suggested in existing designs of the same or similar types of products.

The "Patent Examination Guidelines" provide a more detailed interpretation and requirements for this requirement. Among them, the regulation for "the combination of existing designs and their features" states that combination includes splicing and replacement, which refers to combining two or more designs or design features into one design, or replacing design features in one design with other design features.

A design obtained by repeatedly arranging a design or design feature as a unit belongs to a combined design. The aforementioned combination also includes splicing and replacing using natural objects, natural scenes, and pure shapes, patterns, colors, or their combinations without product carriers. The following types of combinations belong to situations where there is an obvious suggestion of combination methods, and the designs obtained in this way belong to designs that do not have obvious distinctions compared to existing designs or existing design features: (1) Designs obtained by directly splicing multiple existing designs of the same or similar types of products with or without slight changes. For example, the design formed by directly splicing multiple component products into one. (2) Designs obtained by replacing design features of a product's appearance with design features of another product of the same or similar type, either in their original form or with slight changes. (3) Designs obtained by directly splicing the existing shape design of a product with existing patterns, colors, or their combinations; or designs obtained by replacing patterns, colors, or their combinations in existing designs with those from other existing designs.

2. The concept and role of design features

Here, an important concept is "design features". Existing design features refer to parts of design elements or their combinations in existing designs, such as shape, pattern, color elements, or their combinations in existing designs, or the design of a component of an existing design, such as the design of parts in an overall appearance design product. A design obtained by repeatedly arranging a design or design feature as a unit belongs to a combined design. If this combined design is determined to be "not obviously different from the combination of existing design features", it cannot obtain design patent authorization.

If the design features used for combination in existing designs are part of a certain part of the product, and this part is not independently distinguishable from the product and does not have an independent visual effect, then this part cannot be combined as a design feature. If one wants to assert that the patent in question or the patent application does not have obvious distinctions compared to the combination of existing design features, that is, to claim that the design in question is obtained from the combination of two existing designs, then at least the following steps must be taken: first, prove that the existing design discloses these design features and specify which specific design features in the existing design are combined; next, explain whether the combination method of the existing design's design features is splicing or replacing, and finally, prove that the existing design has suggestions for combination.

3. In the granting and confirmation of design patents, "design features"

The distinction from "design concepts"

According to the "Patent Law", "Examination Guidelines", and the spirit of previous case reviews, for the combination of designs, the design features that can be used for combination should be product components that have independent functions and can be physically separated, or independent designs that, although physically inseparable, can be visually distinguished. It is not permissible to simply combine arbitrary points, lines, or surfaces taken from a product, nor to combine a certain design concept. If the requester proposes to combine with the closest design features, such as "stripes", "midline length", "height", "symmetry", "slightly tilted back", these do not belong to physically separable independent designs, nor do they belong to visually distinguishable independent designs, but are naturally existing shapes and patterns used in other designs. As industrial design, it is necessary to use various geometric shapes, patterns, and forms for design combinations to achieve special novel aesthetic effects. If it is only because a shape, pattern, or form has been used in other designs that subsequent designs are inferred to be derived from these combinations, this is clearly absurd. Using it in design is not a combination of design features, but an application of design concepts, which cannot be used to challenge the patentability.

In summary, in the process of patent granting and confirmation, when multiple existing designs are involved and elements in existing designs need to be split and combined, it is important to distinguish between "design concepts" and "design features" in order to judge whether the design patent in question meets the conditions for patent authorization.

Key words:

Perspective | Do the investors of a wholly state-owned company bear joint liability for the company's debts?

Perspective | Research on the Allocation of Intergovernmental Responsibilities and Expenditure Responsibilities in Shandong Province

Perspective | Do the investors of a wholly state-owned company bear joint liability for the company's debts?

Perspective | Research on the Allocation of Intergovernmental Responsibilities and Expenditure Responsibilities in Shandong Province