Forskning ved Københavns Universitet - Københavns Universitet

Forside

Copyright and design law: What is left after all and Cofemel? – or: Design law in a ‘double whammy’

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskning

Standard

Copyright and design law: What is left after all and Cofemel? – or: Design law in a ‘double whammy’. / Schovsbo, Jens Hemmingsen.

I: N I R, 2020.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskning

Harvard

Schovsbo, JH 2020, 'Copyright and design law: What is left after all and Cofemel? – or: Design law in a ‘double whammy’', N I R.

APA

Schovsbo, J. H. (2020). Copyright and design law: What is left after all and Cofemel? – or: Design law in a ‘double whammy’. Manuskript afsendt til publicering.

Vancouver

Schovsbo JH. Copyright and design law: What is left after all and Cofemel? – or: Design law in a ‘double whammy’. N I R. 2020.

Author

Schovsbo, Jens Hemmingsen. / Copyright and design law: What is left after all and Cofemel? – or: Design law in a ‘double whammy’. I: N I R. 2020.

Bibtex

@article{e7d0a8263bd34d4b83f67d1b4fb50305,
title = "Copyright and design law: What is left after all and Cofemel? – or: Design law in a ‘double whammy’",
abstract = "Following the CJEU’s decisions in Cofemel a general, autonomous and unified concept of a ‘work’ applies to all areas of copyright including works of applied art (‘designs’). The Court emphasized the dual track system for the protection of product design in the EU via both copyright and design law. However, as the Court also did not include clear guidance for national courts on how to draw the line for copyright protection in trivial and functional products the decision is most likely going to fuel an expansion of copyright’s reach. Because of the principle of cumulation the overlap between copyright and design law is going to be very substantial. At the same time as copyright is expanding the Doceram-decision from the CJEU limited design protection for products which are ‘dictated by function’ even if ‘alternative shapes’ are available. Because of the expansion of copyright (Cofemel) and the contraction of design law (Doceram) design law finds itself in a ‘double-whammy’ which will increase the pressure on design law. In the final part the article discusses ways of securing the overall balance while leaving enough room for the co-existence of both copyright and design law.",
author = "Schovsbo, {Jens Hemmingsen}",
year = "2020",
language = "Dansk",
journal = "N I R",
issn = "0027-6723",
publisher = "F{\"o}reningen f{\"o}r Nordiskt Immateriellt R{\"a}ttsskydd",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Copyright and design law: What is left after all and Cofemel? – or: Design law in a ‘double whammy’

AU - Schovsbo, Jens Hemmingsen

PY - 2020

Y1 - 2020

N2 - Following the CJEU’s decisions in Cofemel a general, autonomous and unified concept of a ‘work’ applies to all areas of copyright including works of applied art (‘designs’). The Court emphasized the dual track system for the protection of product design in the EU via both copyright and design law. However, as the Court also did not include clear guidance for national courts on how to draw the line for copyright protection in trivial and functional products the decision is most likely going to fuel an expansion of copyright’s reach. Because of the principle of cumulation the overlap between copyright and design law is going to be very substantial. At the same time as copyright is expanding the Doceram-decision from the CJEU limited design protection for products which are ‘dictated by function’ even if ‘alternative shapes’ are available. Because of the expansion of copyright (Cofemel) and the contraction of design law (Doceram) design law finds itself in a ‘double-whammy’ which will increase the pressure on design law. In the final part the article discusses ways of securing the overall balance while leaving enough room for the co-existence of both copyright and design law.

AB - Following the CJEU’s decisions in Cofemel a general, autonomous and unified concept of a ‘work’ applies to all areas of copyright including works of applied art (‘designs’). The Court emphasized the dual track system for the protection of product design in the EU via both copyright and design law. However, as the Court also did not include clear guidance for national courts on how to draw the line for copyright protection in trivial and functional products the decision is most likely going to fuel an expansion of copyright’s reach. Because of the principle of cumulation the overlap between copyright and design law is going to be very substantial. At the same time as copyright is expanding the Doceram-decision from the CJEU limited design protection for products which are ‘dictated by function’ even if ‘alternative shapes’ are available. Because of the expansion of copyright (Cofemel) and the contraction of design law (Doceram) design law finds itself in a ‘double-whammy’ which will increase the pressure on design law. In the final part the article discusses ways of securing the overall balance while leaving enough room for the co-existence of both copyright and design law.

M3 - Tidsskriftartikel

JO - N I R

JF - N I R

SN - 0027-6723

ER -

ID: 234086867