Design Registration & Protection in India

Design registration and protection in India - Intellect Vidhya

It is undeniable that the goodwill and reputation earned in a market contribute significantly to the success of a product or brand in that market; however, this contribution is made after the brand has already established a name for itself and not at the very beginning of the process. But the question is what makes a product famous and different from others, which attracts the consumers towards buying it and making it a success in the market? The answer to this question is “Design”. A design helps a product to make a long-lasting impact on anyone viewing that design, and over the course of time, many brands have started to register their designs in accordance with the Designs Act, 2000. Because it prevents the protected design from being copied or stolen, the Design registration in India is just as crucial as the registration of any other kind of intellectual property.

What is a Design?

In India, a registered design shall include the aesthetics and overall appearance of any product. However, it is important to understand that unlike trademarks law which doesn’t make the registration mandatory, the design protection in India begins only after the registration of a design and not without it.

The Law

In India, the registration of design is been under the Design Act, 2000. It is the law that protects and governs the registration of designs as an Intellectual Property in India. Section 2(d) of the Act defines a design as the shape, configuration, pattern, decoration, or composition of lines or colors applied to any object by any industrial method or means. The item may be two-dimensional or three-dimensional and must be capable of being manufactured and sold separately. The design of the final product should be aesthetically pleasing and evaluated only by sight. The protection of designs excludes any form or principle of construction or anything that is essentially a mechanical device, as well as any trademark, service mark, or artistic creation.

Pre-requisite to register and industrial design in India

In order for a design to be eligible for registration under the Designs Act, it is required to possess the following attributes, as outlined in Section 4 of the Act:

  • It ought to be something fresh and unique – like every other kind of intellectual property, a design seeking registration must be new and original, something that has not being copied from any previous works.
  • It must not be made known to the general public in any way, either by publishing or through use – The design must be one of a kind and must not have been seen to the general public in any part of India or anywhere else in the globe before, either by its use or its prior publication or via any other means.
  • It should be able to be easily distinguished from previously known designs or combination of previously known designs.
  • It shouldn’t contain anything that could be considered controversial or indecent- It must be registrable in accordance with section 5 of the Design Act of 2000. The design may not be registered if it violates public morality or offends the public’s sensibilities.

It was ascertained in the case Bharat Glass Tube Ltd. v. Gopal Glass Works Ltd., 2008 (10) SCC 657: 2008 (7) SCR 397, that the phrase “new or original” refers to the fact that the design that has been registered has not been published anywhere or made known to the general public. It was either something that had never been done before or something that had never been replicated by anyone.

Who can apply for a design registration?

A design that is original, hasn’t been published before in another nation, and doesn’t appear to be in conflict with any local laws or regulations may be registered by any proprietor (design owner) who submits an application. The word “proprietor” has been defined in accordance with Section 2(j) as the individual who: 

  • Is the author of the design; 
  • Has acquired the design for a legitimate consideration; and 
  • Anyone to whom that design has been devolved from the original title holder.

Registration Procedure of a Design 

The design registration confers the Designs owner several rights, the most essential of which is the ability to take legal action against design infringement or piracy. The process of registering designs in India is outlined in Chapter 2 of the Design Act. To successfully register your design, you will need to follow the following steps:

  • Prior Search

The criterion that a design be innovative and original can only be satisfied by conducting prior work searches in the accessible databases. Searches for ‘design’ in India are conducted using Locarno classification, which is an international classification system used for the registration of Industrial Design. Locarno classification has 32 classes and the prior search is to be conducted under the class the article belongs to.

  • Filing of application- with statement of novelty

If no identical designs were located during the earlier search, the next step is to submit an application for registration in the prescribed format and with the prescribed fee to the Design & Patent Office, Kolkata.

A brief declaration of novelty (notice that to be eligible for registration, a design must be fresh and original, as stated above) and a disclaimer should be placed on the representation, which will result in faster scrutiny and more specific protection.

  • Examination Stage

After the application has been filed, the Controller of Designs conducts an examination. If the controller is unsatisfied or has any concerns about the application, he or she may file an objection. The applicant is then given the opportunity to submit a timely (within 3 months) response to the examination report.

  • Acceptance

The application is accepted if the Controller deems the written response suitable. Generally, if the Controller has an objection, an opportunity for a hearing is granted; if the Controller is not persuaded by the design during the hearing, the design is rejected. After acceptance, the design is then published in the Official Gazette.

Can priority be claimed for design applications from a foreign application?

In India, the provision to claim priority for design application from a foreign application is provided under Section 5 of the Designs Act, 2000. This section states that an applicant may claim priority for a design application from a corresponding foreign application, provided that the foreign application was filed within six months of the date of filing of the Indian application and the foreign application is still pending. Priority documents should be filed with the relevant patent office. The priority document must include a copy of the foreign application and a certified translation of the foreign application, if necessary.

Term of Protection 

The duration of design protection in India after its registration is initially ten years. In the event that priority is claimed in regard to a Design, the term is ten years starting from the day the priority was granted.

Before the first period of copyright expires, the term of Design may be extended for an additional period of five years by submitting an application in the required form and paying the prescribed fee to the Controller. This must be done before the initial period of copyright expires.

Registration Fee

The design registration fee in India is variable depending on the kind of applicant:

  • The filing fees for a natural person is Rs.1000,
  • The filing fees for a small entity is Rs.2000, and 
  • The filing fee for other entities except small entity is Rs.4000.

Examples of ‘Designs’ published in the Patent Journal dated 16/12/2022

Benefits of registering a design

Since a consumer frequently bases their purchase decision on a product’s aesthetics, including shape, appearance, color scheme, ornamentation, etc., design registrations are very helpful in this regard. Based on the aesthetics of the product, consumers may also link it to a specific business or quality level. For businesses, differentiating their products from those of competitors is easiest through product design. Additionally, in order to increase their market share, businesses that make imitation goods frequently replicate the design, or the way a product feels and looks. Therefore, it is crucial to prevent the design from being copied.


In India, design registration is frequently found to overlap with trademarks and copyrights. People look for ways to register their designs as trademarks or as artistic works under copyright because the duration of protection for a design in India is maximum 15 years, whereas a trademark is protected for life (based on renewal) and a copyright exists during the author’s lifetime and also 60 years after the author’s death. Steps should be taken to increase the duration of protection offered for designs in order to get more individuals applying for design registration and keep the law alive.


Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on whatsapp
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on whatsapp

Related Posts

Micro Copyright in India: Protecting Small-Scale Creative Works

In the digital age, the creation and sharing of content have reached unprecedented heights. With the proliferation of user-generated content, short-form media, and the increasing significance of individual contributions to larger works, the concept of “micro copyright” has emerged. Micro copyright refers to the protection of smaller, often more granular, creative expressions. In the context of Indian copyright law, this concept presents unique challenges and opportunities. This article explores the intricacies of micro copyright and the conundrums surrounding its protection in India. Understanding Micro Copyright Micro copyright encompasses the rights associated with smaller creative works such as social media posts, memes, short videos, gifs, and even individual elements within larger works, like specific phrases or designs. These forms of content, while often brief and seemingly inconsequential, can hold significant value and can be the subject of copyright protection. The Legal Framework of Copyright in India The Indian Copyright Act, 1957, primarily governs copyright protection in India. The Act provides protection to original literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, cinematograph films, and sound recordings. For a work to be protected, it must be original and expressed in a tangible form. Challenges in Protecting Micro Copyright 1. Originality and Fixation One of the fundamental requirements for copyright protection is that the work must be original and fixed in a tangible medium. This can be challenging for micro content, where the line between original creation and common expression is often blurred. Determining the originality of a tweet, meme, or short video clip can be subjective and contentious. 2. De Minimis Doctrine The de minimis doctrine, which means “about minimal things,” can pose a significant challenge for micro copyright. This doctrine suggests that the law does not concern itself with trivial matters. Small snippets of content might be considered too insignificant to warrant protection, leaving creators without legal recourse for unauthorized use. 3. Fair Use The concept of fair use allows for limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders. In the context of micro copyright, determining what constitutes fair use can be particularly tricky. For instance, sharing a meme or a short clip might be considered fair use, but if it goes viral and gains commercial value, the original creator might seek protection and compensation. 4. Enforcement and Attribution Even if micro content is eligible for copyright protection, enforcing these rights can be challenging. Monitoring the vast expanse of the internet for unauthorized use of small-scale content is a daunting task. Additionally, the ease with which digital content can be shared and altered complicates the process of ensuring proper attribution and compensation. The Way Forward 1. Clearer Guidelines and Definitions To address the challenges of micro copyright, clearer guidelines and definitions are needed within the Indian Copyright Act. Defining what constitutes a protectable micro work and setting standards for originality can provide better clarity for creators and users alike. 2. Digital Rights Management (DRM) and Technology Leveraging technology, such as digital rights management (DRM) systems and content recognition algorithms, can help creators monitor and enforce their copyright more effectively. These technologies can automate the process of identifying unauthorized uses and facilitate easier enforcement. 3. Education and Awareness Increasing awareness among creators about their rights and the mechanisms available for protecting their content is crucial. Educational campaigns and resources can empower creators to navigate the complexities of copyright law and safeguard their micro creations. 4. Legal Reform and International Cooperation Given the global nature of digital content, international cooperation and harmonization of copyright laws can play a significant role in addressing the challenges of micro copyright. Legal reforms that consider the unique nature of digital content and micro works can provide a more robust framework for protection. Conclusion The rise of micro copyright in the digital era presents a unique conundrum under Indian copyright law. While the current legal framework provides a foundation for protecting creative works, the nuances of micro content require more specific attention and adaptation. By addressing the challenges of originality, fair use, enforcement, and attribution, and by leveraging technology and education, India can better protect the rights of creators in the evolving landscape of digital content.

Read More »
Importance of Trademarking your Restaurant Name - Intellect Vidhya

Importance of Trademarking your Restaurant Name

Have you ever walked into a restaurant, drawn by its catchy name or eye-catching logo, only to discover that it’s not the establishment you thought it was? In the bustling food and hospitality industry of India, this scenario is becoming increasingly common. As more and more eateries pop up, it’s crucial for restaurant owners to protect their brand’s identity through trademark registration. A trademark is like a unique fingerprint that sets your goods or services apart from the competition. It’s a legal stamp that says, “This is ours, and no one else can use it.” And in the world of restaurants, where first impressions can make or break your business, a strong trademark can be a game-changer. Why Trademarks Matter for Restaurateurs? Success Stories of Trademarked Restaurant Brands The Consequences of Neglecting Trademark Protection In the vibrant culinary landscape of India, trademarking your restaurant brand is more than just a formality – it’s a strategic move that can safeguard your business identity, maintain brand recognition, and provide legal recourse against infringement. By understanding the importance of trademarks and understanding the appropriate registration process under Indian trademark law, you can protect your valuable intellectual property and pave the way for a future as bright as a perfectly cooked dish, fresh out of the kitchen.

Read More »
The Significance Of Prior Use In The Trademark Law Vans V Ivans - Intellect Vidhya

The Significance of Prior Use in the Trademark Law: Vans v. Ivans

In the complex realm of intellectual property rights, few principles hold as much significance as the concept of “prior use” in Indian trademark law. The recent ruling by the Delhi High Court in the Vans v. Ivans case has brought attention to the fundamental concept of giving precedence to the first user of a trademark in the market. The Vans v. Ivans Case: The case centred on a disagreement between Vans Inc., a well-known American footwear and apparel company, and FCB Garment Tex, an Indian company that used the “IVANS” trademark. Vans Inc. filed a request to invalidate FCB Garment Tex’s trademark registration in India, claiming that their “VANS” mark had recently gained recognition as a well-known trademark in the country. Nevertheless, the Delhi High Court ruled in favour of FCB Garment Tex, citing the prior use principle. Important Factors in the Court’s Decision The court’s ruling was influenced by several crucial elements. Firstly, it emphasised that FCB Garment Tex had been using the “IVANS” mark in India for years before Vans Inc. entered the market, applying the “first in the market” principle. Furthermore, the court made it clear that simply declaring a trademark as well-known does not automatically give the owner the authority to cancel other marks that were used earlier in India. Finally, the court determined that FCB Garment’s utilisation of the marks was both sincere and simultaneous, granting them protection under Section 12 of the Trade Marks Act. Supporting the Principle of Prior Use This landmark ruling is a strong affirmation of the prior use principle in Indian trademark law. This principle emphasises that the initial user of a trademark in the market holds greater rights compared to later users, regardless of their registration status. This concept is deeply embedded in the Indian Trade Marks Act, 1999, and aims to safeguard businesses that have dedicated significant time and resources to establish their brand identity in the market. The Reasoning Behind Prior Use There are several reasons behind the prior use principle. It strives to recognise and safeguard businesses that have proactively built their brands in the marketplace. By prioritising the initial user, the law recognises the dedication and resources required to establish a strong brand presence and cultivate customer loyalty. This principle also helps to prevent unfair competition by ensuring that well-known brands are not replaced by new ones with similar marks, thus maintaining consumer trust and market stability. Territorial Nature of Trademark Rights In addition, the principle of prior use acknowledges the territorial nature of trademark rights. The Vans v. Ivans case clearly illustrates that having a worldwide reputation is not enough to establish legal rights in a particular jurisdiction. The principle highlights the significance of establishing a tangible market presence and utilising a trademark within India, rather than solely relying on international recognition or registration in other nations. Engaging with well-known Trademarks The prior use principle also has implications for other aspects of trademark law, including the recognition of well-known trademarks. The ruling by the Delhi High Court provides clarity on the advantages of having a well-known trademark status, while also acknowledging the rights of prior users in the market. This delicate equilibrium ensures the safeguarding of well-known local brands while acknowledging the prestige and recognition of globally renowned trademarks. Practical Considerations for Trademark Owners In practice, trademark owners are faced with a significant burden of maintaining proper documentation of their trademark use due to the prior use principle. This encompasses sales records, advertisements, and proof of customer recognition. Consistent and authentic use of the mark is essential, as any substantial gaps in usage can undermine a prior use claim. Conclusion Ultimately, the verdict of the Delhi High Court in the Vans v. Ivans case serves as a strong affirmation of the prior use principle within Indian trademark law. It emphasises the significance of having a strong market presence and building a reputable brand in order to establish and safeguard trademark rights in India. As the country continues to attract global brands while nurturing its own business ecosystem, this principle will undoubtedly have a significant impact on the development of trademark strategies and dispute resolutions.

Read More »
The Ethical and Legal Dilemma of AI Voice Cloning in the Music Industry - Intellect Vidhya

The Ethical and Legal Dilemma of AI Voice Cloning in the Music Industry

In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has made remarkable progress in various fields, including music production. Voice cloning in music has been a subject of intense debate, raising questions about copyright infringement, moral rights, and the preservation of artistic integrity. The recent criticism voiced by legendary Indian playback singer Kumar Sanu against AI voice duplication brings attention to the mounting concerns within the music industry. Power and Potential of AI Voice Cloning AI voice cloning technology has made significant progress in recreating the voices of singers with outstanding precision. This ability has resulted in the development of new songs that utilise the voices of artists who have passed away, as demonstrated in the recent example of “Pehle Hi Main.” This song was created using an AI-generated voice that mimics the late Mohammed Rafi, who sadly passed away in 1980. Although this technology presents fascinating opportunities for music production and preservation, it also brings up important ethical and legal concerns. Dealing with Copyright Infringement Copyright infringement is a significant legal concern when it comes to AI voice cloning. A singer’s voice is regarded as their valuable asset, safeguarded by copyright laws in numerous jurisdictions. When AI is employed to imitate a singer’s voice without authorization, it may potentially infringe upon copyright protections. This encompasses violations of reproduction rights, distribution rights, and the unauthorised creation of derivative works. Moral Rights and Personality Rights In addition to copyright concerns, AI voice cloning also brings up ethical and legal questions surrounding moral rights and personality rights. It is important for singers to safeguard their work from any alterations or manipulations that may negatively impact their reputation. Additionally, there is a potential for confusion and misrepresentation when AI-generated voices are not explicitly identified. Furthermore, in numerous legal systems, people possess the authority to regulate the commercial exploitation of their identity, appearance, or voice. Voice cloning might be perceived as a violation of these rights. Cloning the Voices of Deceased Artists Using AI to replicate the voices of deceased artists, such as Mohammed Rafi, brings about a whole new set of challenges. Although copyright protection usually lasts for many years after an artist’s passing, the ethical considerations surrounding the use of a deceased artist’s voice without their permission are quite substantial. There are concerns regarding the preservation of the legacy and artistic intentions of deceased musicians. Industry Response Kumar Sanu’s decision to pursue legal protection against AI voice cloning demonstrates a rising recognition of these concerns within the music industry. Other artists and industry professionals are also advocating for the establishment of regulatory frameworks to oversee the utilisation of AI in music production. There are several potential solutions being discussed to address the challenges posed by AI in music. These include establishing licencing protocols for the use of AI-cloned voices, requiring clear disclosure when AI voice cloning is used in a production, and developing specific laws to tackle these unique challenges. The Path Forward As AI technology advances, it is essential for the legal system to stay up to date. Collaboration between the music industry, legislators, and AI developers is crucial in establishing a framework that balances the protection of artists’ rights with the promotion of innovation. This could potentially include the need to revise copyright laws to specifically tackle AI-generated content, setting industry norms for the ethical application of AI in music production, and devising methods for artists to maintain control over and profit from the utilisation of their AI-replicated voices. Conclusion The emergence of AI voice cloning technology brings forth a range of possibilities and complexities for the music industry. Although it presents exciting opportunities for creativity, it also raises serious concerns regarding artists’ rights and the authenticity of their work. As evidenced by Kumar Sanu’s case, it is clear that there is a pressing requirement for the establishment of legal and ethical frameworks to regulate the utilisation of this technology. As we move forward with the more enhanced versions of AI, it’s crucial to find a harmony between technological advancement and safeguarding artists’ rights. It is crucial to establish thoughtful regulation and foster industry cooperation to ensure that AI positively impacts the creative ecosystem of the music industry.

Read More »