|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
HOME > Resources >
Newsletters |
|
|
| |
|
|
Title |
|
KIPO revised the design examination criteria to improve a determination on whether a design is similar to another design and a method of drawing a drawing(s), etc.(News Letter No. 556) |
|
|
Author |
|
KH |
|
Post Date |
|
2025-07-16 |
|
|
Read |
|
162 |
|
Attach File |
|
- |
|
1. KIPO revised the design examination criteria to improve a determination on whether a design is similar to another design and a method of drawing a drawing(s), etc.
According to KIPO, from June 16, 2025 the revised design examination criteria was implemented to strengthen the convenience of an applicant of a design application and the right protection.
The major content of the revised examination criteria focuses on strengthening the efficiency of examination practices and creating a user-centered design system by reflecting what was suggested in the process of communicating with companies, individuals, designers, etc.
Before the revision, in the case of 2 or more similar design applications, nevertheless the designs are similar to each other, since these applications are filed for a full design and a partial design, respectively, these designs were decided as being not similar to each other in the examination process and 2 designs were both decided to be registered. This caused confusion due to the existence of overlapping rights for similar designs and an infringement issue of the right of an applicant filing the earlier application.
After the revision, the criteria for determining similarity which is the key to design examination has been improved. Under the revised examination criteria, when 2 or more similar applications are filed, regardless whether these applications are filed for a full design or a partial design, registrability is decided by judging a substantial similarity of the relevant designs, thereby preventing a similar design from being registered.
Before the revision, a ‘drawing(s)’ and a ‘description of a design’ must be presented in a design application. However, there was inconvenience to an applicant since the applicant additionally describe materials, purposes, etc. as a matter of practice in the description of a design.
After the revision, if an examiner can sufficiently understand a design filed in an application, even though an applicant may not describe materials or purposes, etc., the revised examination criteria make it impossible to use this as a reason for rejection, thereby increasing convenience for an applicant of a design application.
Before the revision, a vehicle interior design is more than just a ‘nice’ car and it is an important part which directly affects a consumer’s lifestyle, convenience and emotional satisfaction and which connects to a brand value, so that it is a key factor for a consumer in selecting a car. However, there were no clear examination regulations for vehicle interior designs.
After the revision, the revised examination criteria present a specific registration approval case(s) of the combination of automobile interior design including an instrument panel, steering wheel, manipulation unit, dashboard, console box, chair, etc.
2. KIPO ran a Korea-China IP exchange meeting (June 10~13, 2025).
-It is available to directly ask a Chinese local official how to protect a Chinese IP right.
KIPO announced to hold the Korea-China IP exchange meeting from June 10 to June 13, to strengthen the Korea-China IP cooperation and the IP protection of Korean companies expanding in China.
This meeting was prepared to share the major content, such as the amendment to the two countries’ IP protection related laws and systems, and to resolve difficulties relating to IP rights of Korean companies expanding in China, by inviting central and local government officials in charge of IP services in China to South Korea.
The Chinese visiting group carried out the schedule as follows: ▲ a KIPO visit meeting to share IP the IP protection systems (June 11), ▲ a company site visit to listen to local IP issues of a company(ies) expanding in China (June 11~12), and ▲attend an IP protection seminar for companies expanding (or planning to expand) in China, etc. (June 12).
In the IP protection seminar for the Korean companies expanding (or planning to expand) China, Chinese IP systems were introduced, the precautions to consider when entering China were presented, the Chinese visiting group’s specific answers to Korean companies’ questions were provided.
The director of the intellectual property protection and international cooperation bureau of KIPO said, “we are expecting that the cooperative base for Korea-China IP protection will be further strengthened through this invitation exchange meeting…we will strengthen support to resolve local IP problems of Korean companies expanding overseas.”
3. KIPO took full measures to combat the distribution of counterfeit products in the major markets nationwide.
-Distribution of counterfeit products were intensively controlled in the major markets nationwide, Seoul, Busan, Daegu, etc.
-Campaigns with ‘Fake OUT Genuine OK’ unfolded across the country…to raise the consumer’s awareness and restore the market order.
On June 27, 2025, a distribution crime investigation team of KIPO’s trademark special judicial police (hereinafter, referred to as a ‘trademark police’) announced that they would intensively control to eradicate the distribution of counterfeit products in the major markets nationwide.
The trademark police plans to focus on increasing the reliability of the domestic distribution market by strengthening IP protection and establishing fair market order by cracking down on major distribution channels of counterfeit products.
The distribution crime investigation team of the trademark police (newly established in April 7, 2025) conducted crackdown on Saebit Market located Dongdamoon, Seoul (April~May, 2025). This team launched a joint crackdown with Seoul City Hall, Seoul Jung-gu Office and Seoul Jungbu Police Station, arresting 5 people including “A” (female, age: 61) who sold counterfeit products, without detention on charges of violating the Korean Trademark Act. They also confiscated 296 counterfeit products, such as clothes, shoes, etc. of 36 famous brands such as Louis Vuitton, Chanel, Gucchi, etc., on the spot.
The trademark police has a plan to conduct a customized crackdown by blocking a supply channel by tracking the counterfeit wholesale trade network in the major market nationwide, such as Busan, Daegu, etc., and by intensively cracking down an act of selling counterfeit products to tourists.
Campaigns with ‘Fake OUT Genuine OK’ unfolded across the country…to raise the consumer’s awareness and restore the market order
KIPO also took steps to raise consumer awareness by running the IP protection intensive campaign. KIPO conducted the campaign, ‘Fake OUT Genuine OK!’, in the densely populated areas and markets, such as Seoul, Busan, Daegu, etc. in May 2025, together with the local governments, such as Seoul City Hall, Seoul Jung-gu Office, Busan Jung-gu Office and Daegu Jung-gu Office, and Seoul Jungbu Police Station, Korea Consumer Agency, Korea Intellectual Property Protection Agency and trademark right owners (May 15, 16 and 26)
The trademark police will focus crackdown on major distribution hubs of counterfeit products by strengthening cooperation with related organizations and carry out various promotional activities such that consumers are able to recognize the illegality of purchasing counterfeit products.
4. KIPO-Korea International Trade Association (KITA) held a policy meeting with export companies to support Korean companies in securing trademark rights early.
KIPO and KITA held a policy meeting in the trademark and design fields, to strengthen competitiveness of IP-based export companies.
Since the need for Korea companies’ capabilities to secure and utilize IP rights has been increasing due to rapid changes in the external trade environment, such as US tariff measures, etc., this meeting was prepared for export companies to listen to the difficulties relating to IP, such as trademarks and designs, etc. and to explore the IP support policies that companies need.
In this policy meeting, 15 people participated including small and medium companies and middle market companies’ practitioners and staff in charge of IP in the various fields, such as cosmetics, kitchenware, household goods, food, etc.
The meeting was to introduce overseas trademark and design application systems and preferential examination systems, listen to suggestions of the participating companies and to answer thereto. In the meeting, discussions were also conducted on how to lower the threshold for using the trademark and design systems including the preferential examination system of a Korean trademark application as the basis for overseas application(s).
In addition, they listened to the various voices of the field, such as ▲ difficulties in securing an IP right, ▲ difficulties related to IP rights, such as unauthorized preoccupation and infringement of trademarks, ▲ necessity to secure early Korean trademark rights (design rights), and ▲ institutional improvement necessary items due to differences from global standards, etc., all which companies have experienced in overseas export sites.
5. If you reduce errors, you can register a design application in one step.
-A design can be quickly registered by accurately drawing a drawing(s) and describing the name(s) of an item(s).
The most common reason for rejection of a design registration which applicants of design applications have experienced has been indicated as an error(s) in making a drawing(s) and description of a design.
According to KIPO, the most reasons for the rejection of design registration in 2024 were ‘error(s) in making a drawing(s) and description of a design’ at 36.9%, followed by ‘inaccuracy in the name(s) of item(s) and the class(s) of item(s)’ at 19.6%. In addition, a ‘lack of creativity’ was 14.9%, a ‘lack of novelty’ was 14.3% and the others were 14.3%.
1) The most common mistake that applicants make is making a drawing(s). “A” filing an application for a design relating to a tabletop stand lighting drawn an operation button round in a perspective view but described the same in square shape in a side view.
An applicant, “B”, submit a drawing(s) in a picture(s) when filing an application for a bag design. However, when taking a picture(s), the accessory (a key ring) next to the bag was taken in the picture(s) and the applicant submit the picture(s) without any additional explanation. However, an examiner considering that the scope of protection would be unclear issued a correction order.
To prevent these cases, one needs to first check the regulations (design drawings in attached Form 4) set out in the Enforcement Rule of the Korean Design Act. You may refer a ‘design drawing guidebook for filing an application by yourself’ which guides how to make a drawing(s) for an individual applicant.
2) It is also a common type of rejection in which the name of an item and the class of an item are incorrectly written and rejected. As a example case, when filing an application for a design relating to a wireless earphone charging case, if the name of the item is described simply as ‘case’, this can be a target to be required for correction since it is not clear what the item is used for.
Therefore, it is recommended that an applicant shall check the KIPO website for the latest notification of the list of items at the time of filing an application and also check the clear and correct name(s)and class(es) of an item(s) by using the search service of the related item(s).
|
|
|
|
|
Prev |
|
Korean IP News No. 125 in Chines
|
|
|
Next |
|
Korean Industrial Insight No. 14 of AI, Semiconductors, Batteries, Electric vehicles, and Bio
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
