Survey on priorities to shape UK system for protecting designs

Design rights protect the appearance of all or part of a product design and the shape or configuration (whether internal or external) of the whole or part of an item.

This includes ceramics, jewellery and surface patterns, and if you create any of these the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) want to hear from you to help shape the UK system for protecting designs.

The Intellectual Property (IP) framework protects designers’ work and creativity through both registered and unregistered designs. This enables designers to legally protect their work and livelihoods from copying and take enforcement action if their IP has been infringed. The IPO are currently reviewing the designs framework looking at issues including presumption of validity of designs, simplification of the UK designs system, post-Brexit issues, future technology, and enforcement of rights. They have published a survey seeking views on the overarching principles, and the responses to this survey will shape their proposals and consultation. They will then publish a formal consultation later in 2025.

Currently, there are two definitions of design in IP law. These definitions are from the gov.uk site: 

The appearance of the whole or a part of a product resulting from the features of, in particular, the lines, contours, colours, shape, texture or materials of the product or its ornamentation. This definition applies to UK registered designs and supplementary unregistered designs. 
The design of the shape or configuration (whether internal or external) of the whole or part of an article. This definition applies to UK unregistered design right.

IPO say: ‘These definitions of what a design is limit the way IP can be used to protect designs to the appearance of a product, its shape, or the way the parts of an article are arranged.  

It is generally accepted in the current UK IP protection system for designs that “design” relates to the appearance of a product.  However, products can have a wider sensory experience than visual aesthetics. We want to explore whether the term “design” should extend to features perceived by other senses.’

How unregistered designs are protected

How to register a design, and the protection it provides

Here are a few YouTube videos that may be helpful in understanding the protection:

From IPO:

Overarching principles 

What principles should shape the UK designs system? 

Users such as yourself have previously told us that they value the speed and low cost of design registration in the UK. Others have said that they like the choice of different types of protection available. We want to know what matters to designers now. 

We have identified five principles which we think are relevant to the design protection system.  We want to understand what designers, users and other interested parties think about them.  

The principles are: Cost, Validity, Speed, Choice and Simplicity.

Cost principle – the system should offer value for money 

There are fees for the registration and renewal of registered designs. 
Some costs occur for both registered and unregistered designs e.g. cost of enforcement, administrative costs, legal costs. 
Third parties may have to pay to challenge rights they think shouldn’t have been registered, or to check the existence of others’ rights to avoid infringing. 
A low-cost system might mean accepting a lower level of validity.

Validity principle – the system should provide appropriate level of validity and clarity about existence of IP rights 

Designs are only valid if they are new and not too similar to previous designs. 
No checks are currently carried out by the Intellectual Property Office on the validity of designs.  
A high presumption of validity may mean accepting a higher cost to obtain rights and a longer time for them to be registered. 
What presumption of validity do users and third parties want in the system?

Speed principle – design protection should be quick to obtain and enforce. 

A system which registers designs quickly is likely to have a lower presumption of validity. 
A system with a higher presumption of validity is likely to take longer to register designs. 
Some designers may prefer a choice in relation to speed of processing.

Choice principle – the system should provide choice for designers.  

Designs can currently be protected in several different ways – registered designs, two different types of unregistered designs and by copyright if the requirements are met. 
There also choices for enforcement – different courts, tribunal options and alternative dispute resolution. 
The choice currently available means the system can be complicated for designers to understand how best to protect their designs. However, availability of different rights can be useful when enforcing a right, or defending a challenge.

Simplicity principle – the system should be as simple as possible 

A simple system would be more understandable to designers and non-IP experts. 
Simplifying the system might reduce choice for users.

There are interactions and frictions between the principles and it is not possible to have a system which meets all of them. We want to know which of these principles is most important to you and why.  

What should be protected as a design? 

We also want to know what you think should be protected as a design. 

The term “design” has a narrower definition in intellectual property law than in everyday language. IP protects the visual appearance of a product, or elements of a product. Currently a design can only be protected if it is visible in normal use, so for example the components under a car bonnet cannot be protected as designs. 

We would like to know whether users think that the scope of what can be protected meets the needs of designers, consumers and society.  

Let us (IPO) know what you think by responding to our survey here.

The survey closes 1 April 2025

Back to News Page