Analysis Of Patent Protection For Fashion Designers

Just like a girl who walks alone with some weapons of defense at night.

But there are also industries that are not so cold with patents, such as the fashion industry.

In fashion industry, you don't have to worry about those patent killers.

Traditionally, intellectual property rights mainly include patents, trademarks and copyright.

In the United States, which is highly valued by patents, the fashion industry is but the least protected market.

In fact, the fashion industry is one of the least protected industries in the world.

The third largest market in the world, Japan has the design method of protective clothing, but its novelty standard is too high. You must prove that your clothes did not exist in the past. It is completely unique. Fashion designers seldom get patents.

The EU has very low novelty standards, and anyone can apply for anything.

But although it is the birthplace of the fast fashion industry, and there are many luxury design brands, they usually do not register their costumes, nor do they have many related lawsuits.

The United States is one of the best copyright protection countries in the world. Biotechnology, medicine, music, film, painting, photographs, sculpture and books are all strictly protected by law. But why is the fashion industry an exception?

Legal point of view.

American copyright law does not protect "useful articles". Useful articles refer to the functions of an article, rather than special aesthetics or information.

American courts have always regarded costumes as useful articles rather than works of art.

Of course, the fashion industry can look for the right to design patents, but clothing design rarely meets the protection of the design patent.

The cycle is short.

Even if fashion designers can meet the standards of novelty and visibility of design patents, it usually takes one or two years to get a patent, while the product design cycle of fashion design is very short, usually only one season or even weeks.

This is almost no protection for fashion companies.

{page_break}

High cost.

For designers and fashion companies, it's difficult to tell the difference between their own design and other existing designs.

First of all, there is not a complete database containing existing designs.

Second, the cost of doing so is relatively high.

The innovative design protection and prevention piracy act, which the United States is brewing and has great expectations, stipulates that the compensation for infringement of a fashion design is only $1 to $50 thousand.

According to the traditional view, the protection of intellectual property rights can ensure the protection of the interests of innovators, and encourage more innovation, thereby promoting the development of the economy, and ordinary people can also benefit from intellectual property protection.

Without intellectual property protection, the creative and creative industries will wither.

No matter what the purpose is, intellectual property rights are actually a monopoly privilege - to prohibit others from copying and competing for a period of time to get protection.

It is a sure thing that innovators should be rewarded, but what is the most appropriate and effective reward method has always been controversial.

Different from the form of government participation and monopoly, another view is that a fully competitive market can completely reward innovation activities, and copyright and patent rights are unnecessary.

The fashion industry may be a perfect case for the latter view.

Piracy and infringement do not stifle the innovation and growth of the fashion industry. Fashion designers can get whatever elements they want from any style of clothing in history, and then integrate them into their own designs.

If you are concerned about the brutal patent wars in the IT industry in recent years, then you should realize that in the handling of intellectual property rights, we really need to introduce some new valuable thinking.

For example, in the program source code, the concept of "useful articles" is about the cost consciousness of property rights.

Google David Drummond, the chief legal officer, has complained that a smartphone probably involves 250 thousand kinds of patent infringement.

However, we can rest assured that, just as the garment industry will become the blank point of intellectual property protection for efficiency and cycle, when the whole industry is subject to patent protection, there will be changes.

The self adjustment function of Commerce will play a final role. It is not necessary to worry that the patent control companies will eventually tie up the development of the company.