All About Design Patents & Its Impact on Industries

 It is impossible to envisage even one day without a smartphone since they have ingrained themselves so deeply into our daily lives and have become so demanding (for most of us). It gave our generation its identity by putting computing technology in our hands. The Great Patent War, a furious struggle for domination amongst technological goliaths, began as a result of this change in lifestyle. The fight for market dominance has been waged as much in the marketplace as in the courts, with technology companies like Apple becoming involved in some of the most well-known legal disputes, beginning with the Nokia vs. Apple litigation in a series of cases in 2009 and 2010. Later, as it disclosed the inner workings of the two private companies, the first Apple v. Samsung trial, which took place in 2012, captivated Silicon Valley and the I.T. sector.

Their patents, which covered product parts through design patents, were the main source of disagreement between Apple and Samsung. The legal struggle made it clear how crucial it is to protect design through patents in order to save millions of dollars in lost sales and preserve brand exclusivity.

The many design patent wars fought over the years and how they have influenced different industries will be covered in this article.

The Importance of Design Patents

Design patents are granted for an object's ornamental or adorning design. Design patent protection is a successful method to protect your intellectual property in many different industries. Because it is something visually appealing and what pulls a person to a product, the design of a product is typically what people wish to safeguard.

Patents on designs can prevent your rivals from using your creations. Additionally, they can secure significant compensation sums for the design's owner and successfully halt additional imitations. Design patents are granted far more quickly than utility patents, frequently in just 9 to 18 months as opposed to an industry-wide average of 2.5 to 3 years for utility patents. Additionally, they are provided for a 14-year term without any further maintenance costs.

Design patents can be very useful in infringement lawsuits. Comparing the images and finding infringement is usually not too difficult for a jury to do when a rival directly copies a product. It does not require in-depth knowledge of technological challenges. Utility patents, on the other hand, frequently involve sophisticated technologies that a jury could find challenging to understand. Therefore, it is essential to have design patents in your portfolio that have the potential to be very profitable in the future.

Now that we are aware of design patents and their significance, let's talk about why design patent searches are essential to obtaining a patent award.

Searches for Design Patents and Their Relevance

In order to determine whether a comparable or identical design has already been patented, a design patent search involves examining all of the current patents. If the design is original, innovative, or genuine, a design patent will be given. It remains in effect for 14 years after the filing date. It also helps an inventor to create a fresh approach to creating an already existing product. Unique designs are safeguarded by design patents, which do not invalidate already-issued patents.

Although design patents are sought for in almost every sector of the economy, they are most frequently used in the furniture, hardware, tools, food preparation, sports, toys and games, and communication equipment industries.

For innovators who are unsure about whether they require a design patent or a utility patent, a design patent can be confusing. A utility patent protects the entire product, but a design patent only covers the design. This is the main differential between the two. A recent embossed pattern on a tissue is one illustration. Despite the fact that the tissue is unlikely to be copyrighted given its lengthy history, a designer might nonetheless create a distinctive embossed design in the tissue and be eligible for a design patent.

A design patent search is essential since it will prevent you from copying a patent that already exists. There are many websites that let you search for already-issued design patents. But be careful when you carry out your own search. Some websites have restrictions and don't include all of the known design patents.

You can do a search at the USPTO library that is most conveniently located for you. If you don't have access to a real library, you can also look up patents online utilising resources like the USPTO website or Google Patent Search. Simple Patents and Quick Patents, two paid design patent search services, may produce more results. Using one of these search tools can cost anywhere between $175 and $300 (about), depending on its complexity and the services it provides.

Knowing the history of design patents is essential to having a solid grasp of design patent searches and their significance.

Brief History of Design Patents

When people think about patents, which may be issued for machinery, processes, goods, or compositions of matter, they typically think of utility patents. A utility patent consists of one or more claims, a comprehensive technical description, and any necessary illustrations. The components of an invention are described in a utility patent's claims, which also specify the patent's boundaries. The design patent, on the other hand, mainly relies on the drawings to describe what is protected. There is just one claim in a design patent. This claim just refers to the designs as a standard for what is protected, without specifying any structures or elaborating on the design. A design patent is given for an ornamental design of a commercial item, whereas utility patents are given for novel, innovative, and nonobvious concepts. The visual characteristics or aspects that an object displays are referred to by the United States Patent and Trademark Office as its design.

An item's distinctive visual characteristics have unique legal protection under a design patent. It safeguards something's ornamental features while yet serving some practical use. While a design patent may be issued for a purely functional product, this is only possible if the ornamental features outweigh the functional ones. A design that is largely utilitarian in nature cannot be protected by a design patent in the United States.

It took another 52 years for the US patent laws to be modified to permit the patenting of decorative designs, despite the fact that the first Patent Act was passed in 1790. In 1842, patents were issued for any novel and unique designs for manufactures, prints on fabrics, busts, statues, imprints to be applied to manufactured goods, and shapes or configurations of manufactured goods. The design patent statute was later revised in 1902 to simply state that "any new, distinctive, and ornamental design for an object of manufacture" is admissible subject matter.

It is extremely astonishing to learn that the first design patent ever granted in the United States on November 9, 1842, went to George Bruce and had no drawings at all. Given that the design process now mainly relies on graphics to cover every component of the design in depth, this is quite out of the ordinary. The decorative design was not explicitly claimed in Mr. Bruce's design patent, as you would today, but rather was described in words.

The U.S. Federal Circuit changed the substantial likeness standard for design patent infringement in 2008, making it simpler to establish design patent infringement.

Earlier Patent Wars in History

Patent disputes are not a recent development. They have most likely been a constant since the development of the aeroplane. The Wright brothers, who are credited with inventing the aeroplane, used legal action to stop rivals from building aircraft, preventing the American aviation business from expanding. The creator of the telephone, Alexander Graham Bell, became embroiled in a patent fight with rivals that lasted 11 years and produced 600 lawsuits. One such instance is Bell's legal action against Western Union. When Bell wanted to sell his patent, Western Union first showed little interest. Elisha Gray Patent, another telegraphy-related established inventor, piqued the company's interest more. In the end, the case was resolved in Graham Bell's company's favour.

The prevalence of patent disputes has changed with the digital era. Technology companies in the US and Japan engaged in a patent war in the 1980s, pushing them to "fight patent with patent." This bilateral patent dispute had subsided by the middle of the 1990s, although being slightly dramatised by the media. The prevalence of patent warfare increased with the introduction of patent trolling. The term "patent troll" was created by Intel employees in the 1990s and made popular by Intel CEO Peter Detkin. Federal courts started overturning earlier decisions from the patent office during the 1990s. The makers of antiviral software Trend Micro, Integralis, McAffee, and Symantec fought a patent battle in the late 1990s. Two years later, a legal dispute involving the patenting of "one-click ordering technology" broke out between Amazon and Barnes & Noble. The list was expanded by Sony and Kodak, which started a patent dispute over digital cameras in 2004 and continued it until 2007.

Patent litigation trends have changed significantly during the past 15 years, usually reacting to judicial, administrative, and legislative developments.

Total patent litigation more than doubled from 2005 to a peak in 2011–2012, but it has since dropped. NPE activities are the primary cause of the long-term tendency.

Apple-Samsung Patent Wars Timeline

The story of the Apple-Samsung patent dispute is now a topic of conversation in boardrooms. But did you know that the story's beginning was on January 4, 2007, four days before the world was exposed to the amazing iPhone? Regarding the fundamental design of the iPhone, Apple had applied for a total of four design patents. A significant number of colour design patents covering 193 screenshots of various iPhone graphical user interfaces were subsequently submitted in June of the same year. (Source)

The following is a discussion of the four design patents that were initially submitted:

D558757: The basic form of the iPhone, a flat box with rounded corners, was covered by this design patent. The design patent included the front perspective view, rear perspective view, front view, rear view, top view, bottom view, left view, and right view as well as eight other perspectives of the item.

D558756: Connectors, displays, buttons, and other components of the product were covered by the design patent, along with additional elements and features. The design patent covers eight various views of the item, including the front and back perspective views as well as the front, rear, top, bottom, left, and right views.

D580387: This design patent addressed the surface treatment of the product (glass-like). The design patent covers eight various views of the item, including the front and back perspective views as well as the front, rear, top, bottom, left, and right views.

D558758: The colour aspect of the item—such as black, silver, etc.—was covered by the design patent. The design patent covers eight various views of the item, including the front and back perspective views as well as the front, rear, top, bottom, left, and right views.

When Samsung started selling Android smartphones, a legal battle with Apple erupted. Due to this, Steve Jobs, the company's then-CEO, notoriously referred to it as a "stolen" product, or an iPhone imitation.

So, who emerged victorious?

During the patent trial, it was determined that Apple and Samsung had both violated the patents of the other. Samsung experienced a humiliating setback even if it was not required to pay the first $1 billion in damages. Furthermore, Apple, which was also found guilty of copying a number of Samsung's patents, vehemently argued that the punishment was disproportionate. The case emphasises how important it is to safeguard and enforce your design patents in order to prevent brand dilution and millions of dollars in lost revenue.

Impact of Smartphone Patent Wars on Electronics & Communication Industry

The outcome of the smartphone patent war forced the electronics and telecom industries to reconsider their approach to product creation. The expense of the legal battle and the court's punitive action of awarding the plaintiff a huge sum of money hastened a shift in design approach. In contrast to prior years, it was no longer possible to modify an existing design and introduce it to the market. As a result, since 2011 the number of design patent registrations has increased.

To get more information, read entire article on Design Patents