Note that the definition of a design in the 1949 Act is limited to designs, or more properly to features of them, that have eye-appeal. There is no such requirement in the provisions on unregistered design right – deliberately so, since the government was trying to devise a type of protection that would accommodate functional and aesthetic designs. But there is no ‘eye-appeal’ requirement in the proposed directive either, so functional and aesthetic designs will enjoy protection. Just as in the copyright field there is a distinction between idea and expression, so too in the design field function and form have to be distinguished. In neither area is it easy to draw these distinctions: there are schools of thought in the design world (for instance, the Bauhaus) that maintain that the beauty of a design can lie in the way the article performs its function. Certainly, modern design looks on more than mere ornamentation: this the directive seeks to recognise by not excluding the functional from its scope. REGISTERED DESIGNS: REQUIREMENTS FOR PROTECTION

DOI link for Note that the definition of a design in the 1949 Act is limited to designs, or more properly to features of them, that have eye-appeal. There is no such requirement in the provisions on unregistered design right – deliberately so, since the government was trying to devise a type of protection that would accommodate functional and aesthetic designs. But there is no ‘eye-appeal’ requirement in the proposed directive either, so functional and aesthetic designs will enjoy protection. Just as in the copyright field there is a distinction between idea and expression, so too in the design field function and form have to be distinguished. In neither area is it easy to draw these distinctions: there are schools of thought in the design world (for instance, the Bauhaus) that maintain that the beauty of a design can lie in the way the article performs its function. Certainly, modern design looks on more than mere ornamentation: this the directive seeks to recognise by not excluding the functional from its scope. REGISTERED DESIGNS: REQUIREMENTS FOR PROTECTION

Note that the definition of a design in the 1949 Act is limited to designs, or more properly to features of them, that have eye-appeal. There is no such requirement in the provisions on unregistered design right – deliberately so, since the government was trying to devise a type of protection that would accommodate functional and aesthetic designs. But there is no ‘eye-appeal’ requirement in the proposed directive either, so functional and aesthetic designs will enjoy protection. Just as in the copyright field there is a distinction between idea and expression, so too in the design field function and form have to be distinguished. In neither area is it easy to draw these distinctions: there are schools of thought in the design world (for instance, the Bauhaus) that maintain that the beauty of a design can lie in the way the article performs its function. Certainly, modern design looks on more than mere ornamentation: this the directive seeks to recognise by not excluding the functional from its scope. REGISTERED DESIGNS: REQUIREMENTS FOR PROTECTION