EUIPO and the Ukrainian National Office for Intellectual Property and Innovations (UANIPIO) have integrated industrial design data from Ukraine into DesignView.

With this addition, DesignView now includes data from 78 participating IP offices.

The inclusion of Ukraine data into DesignView was implemented under the EU-funded EU4IP project, which supports Ukraine to align its IP framework with EU IP law and standards.

EUIPO said that, thanks to this integration, Ukraine moves closer to the EU national IP offices within the EUIPN, as well as user groups and other IP organisations, improving the IP system in Europe.

DesignView now contains more than 24.7 million industrial designs, including more than 98,300 designs from UANIPIO.

Since it was launched in November 2012, the tool has had nearly 12 million searches by users worldwide.

The US, Germany and the UK are the biggest users of the tool.

In a statement, EUIPO Executive Director João Negrão said: “The integration of Ukraine’s industrial designs into DesignView represents a key step forward in the country’s digital transformation and its alignment with the EU. By offering free, transparent, and comprehensive access to design data from around the world, DesignView supports creators and businesses to protect their intellectual property internationally. This milestone highlights the EUIPO's ongoing dedication to supporting the Ukrainian IP community through the EU-funded EU4IP project, leveraging regional expertise across the EUIPN to strengthen international partnerships.”

Olena Orliuk, Director of UANIPIO, added: “For Ukrainian designers, entrepreneurs and innovators, joining DesignView means becoming more visible to the world. Free access to reliable design information strengthens legal certainty, facilitates international business cooperation and helps promote Ukrainian creativity in global markets. It also represents tangible progress towards Ukraine’s integration into the European intellectual property ecosystem. We are grateful to the EUIPO for its support and cooperation in making this important step possible.”

Information and photo provided to MARQUES by EUIPO

Brand owners, in-house legal teams and IP practitioners will soon have wider opportunities to protect the visual appearance of digital and technology-driven products. On 1 July 2026, the second phase of the EU design law reform package enters into force, introducing important changes to the registration of industrial designs across the EU.

The reform is part of the broader modernisation of the EU design protection system, which includes amendments to the Community Design Regulation and a new Design Directive. It adapts design law to market realities in which product appearance is increasingly expressed through digital interfaces, animations, screen displays and other non-traditional formats.

Broader range of registrable designs

One of the most notable changes is the broader range of registrable designs. The updated framework will make it easier to protect animated designs, including interface transitions and moving visual elements, graphical user interfaces (GUIs), screen-displayed designs and computer-generated designs.

For lawyers advising clients in software, e-commerce, gaming, consumer electronics, fintech and digital platforms, these changes open up new filing strategies and portfolio management considerations.

Procedural improvements

The reform also introduces procedural improvements. EUIPO is simplifying the application process and enabling multi-design applications in new formats, including video files and image sequences for animated designs.

This should make registration better suited to digital products and reduce the mismatch between modern design assets and traditional static filing requirements.

Another practical change is the removal of the previous administrative limit of seven views per design. Applicants will have greater flexibility in presenting their designs, provided that the submitted views collectively show the design in a consistent and clear manner.

This is particularly important for complex or animated designs, where a limited number of static views may not adequately capture the relevant visual features.

The new rules will also allow applicants to correct obvious minor errors (immaterial alterations), provided that such corrections do not alter the identity of the design. This should help reduce unnecessary procedural obstacles where defects are technical or administrative in nature.

The reform creates an opportunity for legal advisers and rights holders to review existing design portfolios and identify digital assets that may now be suitable for registration. It is worth considering whether application interfaces, website layouts, e-commerce animations, on-screen packaging or digital product environments could qualify for protection.

Early action may be important. Filing promptly can help secure priority and strengthen protection against later competing designs. Advisers should also bear in mind that the 12-month grace period remains available, allowing a design to be filed within 12 months of its first disclosure to the market by the right holder.

Annual Conference workshop

Given the practical significance of these developments for the MARQUES community, Annual Conference participants are warmly invited to attend Workshop 5 – “The New Age of EU Designs: Practical orientations for valuable and effective protection through design rights following the EU Reform”, presented by the MARQUES Design Team in cooperation with the EUIPO.

The workshop aims to put the design reform into action and tackle issues that may arise with filing and enforcement of these new types of designs. Participants will work through a realistic filing scenario with built-in challenges, such as unity of design, background of design, immaterial alteration and disclosure issues.

The exercise will also address key legal considerations including scope of protection, enforcement strategies and the application of existing design case law to animated designs.

This post was written by Ewa Jaroszyńska-Kozłowska, partner of WKB Wierciński, Kwieciński, Baehr sp. k. in Warsaw, Poland and a member of the MARQUES Designs Team

Class 99 readers may be interested in a new publication, The Hague Agreement on International Design Registrations: A Commentary.

The book is written by Robert Mirko Stutz and Evelyne Feller, both members of BKS Attorneys Ltd in Switzerland, and published by Edward Elgar as part of its series of commentaries in IP law.

Robert was Vice-Chair of the MARQUES Designs Team from 2013 until 2016 and Co-Chair from January 2016 until the end of 2020.

In the preface, the authors stress the “pivotal role” that the Hague System has played in achieving the goal of harmonising design protection internationally since it was established in 1925.

“With the recent amendments to its Regulations, effective as of 1 January 2025, this is an opportune moment to reflect on the achievements of the Hague System and to offer guidance on leveraging this indispensable legal tool for design law practitioners,” they add.

An introduction sets the Hague Agreement in the context of the history of design, the relationship with other IP rights and the existence of other international agreements. It also explores the development of the Hague System and introduces the Locarno Classification and the Design Law Treaty.

The bulk of the 600-page book comprises three parts.

The first part contains a commentary on each of the articles of the Geneva Act 1999, providing an overview and analysis of concepts and definitions for most of them.

The second part comprises five thematic chapters on: views and reproductions; communication with the International Bureau; time limits and excuses for failure to meet the time limits; national peculiarities; and graphical user interfaces (GUIs).

The chapter on national peculiarities focuses on practices in six key jurisdictions (China, USA, Japan, Republic of Korea, EUIPO and Canada) and contains a range of practical insights that will be invaluable for design law practitioners.

The chapter on GUIs is particularly interesting. The authors summarise the distinct approaches taken in China, Korea, Japan, the US and the UK and discuss a number of examples of GUI designs that have been registered.

They stress the importance of providing the appropriate product indication, representation and description of the product/representation for GUI designs, noting that it is sometimes a challenge to meet different requirements in a single application: “Thus, the aim is to find the largest common denominator in order to be able to file a design application for a GUI design that designates various countries with different requirements.”

The final part of the book reproduces the text of the Geneva Act, Regulations, Administrative Instructions and Hague Act 1960.

The book includes a number of useful charts and tables, and the commentary part has many high-quality illustrations of registered designs that enrich the text.

The book is likely to be very useful for students, researchers and (especially) practitioners. The authors skillfully combine detailed legal analysis with practical insights and examples, making it a valuable resource for anyone who drafts, files and manages design rights internationally.

The Hague Agreement on International Design Registrations: A Commentary (ISBN 978 1 80392 339 0) is available to buy on the Edward Elgar website. It is priced at £245 (hardback) or from £196 (ebook).

According to a new survey by EUIPO, 73% of consumers are willing to pay more for products with a better design and 72% consider design an important factor when choosing what to buy.

Design is very or extremely important when buying a product for 31% of European consumers.

Moreover, 80% of those aged 18 to 24 say design is an important factor in purchasing decisions, Young people are also more likely to be willing to pay higher prices for better-designed products and to associate design with positive emotions.

EUIPO said the survey was conducted by a contractor and was based on a sample of 5,000 respondents (500 from each of Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Portugal and 2,500 from the remaining 22 EU Member States). The answers were collected from 10 April to 3 May 2026.

Young (under-35) consumers are more likely to connect design with aesthetics and innovation, while older consumers are more likely to associate design with ergonomics.

The survey indicated that design matters most in the furniture and fashion industries: 76% of EU consumers consider it very important when buying furniture and 66% when buying clothing and accessories.

EUIPO Executive Director João Negrão said in a statement: “European design is one of our greatest competitive strengths. It shapes the products we trust, value and enjoy every day while helping businesses stand out in the global market. Research confirms that consumers, especially younger generations, recognise the value of good design. Protecting designs gives creators the confidence to innovate and businesses the edge to compete – generating the growth and competitiveness on which Europe’s economy relies.”  

According to the survey, around half of European consumers associate good design with increased satisfaction, more positive feelings towards a brand and greater likelihood of recommending a product.

You can read more on the EUIPO website here. The full report with all the findings and the methodology will be published in the next few weeks. Image taken from the report summary.

EUIPO has published a study on mapping copyright-related databases and metadata standards across the EU.

The study finds that data on works and authors are scattered across unconnected systems and that this fragmentation leads to duplication of records, creating legal uncertainty and increasing transaction costs for creators and right holders.

According to the study, each creative sector such as film and television, music and publishing manage works, rights and distribution models according to their own operational needs. This leads to fragmented approaches and limited interoperability between systems.

According to the Executive Summary: “This fragmentation generates legal uncertainty, inefficiencies in licensing and remuneration, and increased transaction costs for creators, users, intermediaries and public institutions. The importance of metadata and interoperability for the discoverability and circulation of European cultural content in digital environments has also been highlighted in recent EU research.”

The study lays the groundwork for the development of the CopyrightView initiative, which aims to enhance transparency and facilitate access to reliable copyright information.

The findings of the study will inform the work of the CopyrightView Expert Group and future activities in consultation with stakeholders.

The study was conducted under the umbrella of the EUIPO Copyright Knowledge Centre, which was set up in November 2025.

You can read the full study on EUIPO’s website here and the Executive Summary here.

Designer Philippe Starck has been selected as the DesignEuropa Awards 2026 Lifetime Achievement Award winner.

EUIPO has also announced the finalists in the other categories this year: entrepreneurs and small companies and industry. They are:

• CLF Growth Containers (Latvia)
• Pet Shell (Slovenia)
• Showee (Spain)
• CBL 900 (Czechia)
• NOHRD StepTower (Germany)
• SOMATOM On.site (Germany)

For this first time, it is also possible to vote for one of these finalists to receive the Public Choice Award. You can vote here.

The 2026 edition marks the 10^th anniversary of the DesignEuropa Awards. The award winners and the winner of the Next Generation Award will be announced at a ceremony in Ljubljana, Slovenia on 22 September 2026.

Announcing the Lifetime Achievement Award, EUIPO said:

Driven by the conviction that design must improve the lives of as many people as possible, Starck has consistently combined creativity with purpose. His approach goes beyond aesthetics, placing human needs, accessibility and ethical responsibility at the centre of every creation, while promoting a more democratic, sustainable and inclusive vision of design.

From iconic objects such as the Juicy Salif juicer and the Louis Ghost chair, to his pioneering work in architecture, mobility and technology, Philippe Starck has continuously pushed the boundaries of design. By merging innovation with cultural expression and social impact, he has transformed design into a powerful tool for improving daily life and shaping a more responsible future.

The 6^th IP Case Law Conference hosted by the EUIPO Boards of Appeal is taking place in Alicante and online this week. The theme is “Growing through change”.

The second session of the Conference covered the power of designs and was moderated by Inga George of boesling IP, Co-Chair of the MARQUES Designs Team.

Appearances matter

Kicking off the session, Päivi Tahkokallio, founder and CEO of Tahkokallio Design+ and a member of the DesignEuropa Awards jury, discussed the role played by design protection in creating value in designs.

“For me, design protection is about what meets the eye,” she said. She highlighted the values of novelty, sustainability, usability/functionality, aesthetics and ethics in designs and told the audience: “I hope that you all would be willing to dive into the value of design from different aspects than design protection. If you want to do your job properly, you need to understand design in a deeper way!”

Paula de Andrés Gómez of Berggren discussed the Lego exception for modular systems in Article 8(3) of the Design Directive in her presentation. She said that CJEU and EU General Court case law had established that “functionality does not automatically exclude protection”.

“The exception ensures that the design law remains relevant for modular industries. Without it, many products would fall outside protection,” said Paula. “At the same time, it is a targeted exception and designs must comply with requirements such as novelty and inventive character.”

Following her, Philipe Kutschke of Bardehle Pagenberg talked about design law disputes following the design law reform. One area with a significant practical impact, he said, is goods in transit: the burden of proof is on the declarant to prove that products are legal in the final destination. Another key point is the repair clause: the scope is now narrower than it was under previous case law as it applies only to repair, and there is a transparency requirement.

On digital designs, Philipe said the reform speaks of “pixels instead of plastic”: there is no limit to seven static views and animated images are accepted. But he warned: “The risk that AI-generated prior art will flood the internet is imminent.” However, he added that new provisions relating to 3D printing may be relevant to AI-assisted and AI-created designs.

In-person attendees enjoy a coffee break in the Alicante sunshine

“The future of design protection is bright, but we should not underestimate the risks coming with new developments,” Philipe concluded, saying that “solid legislation” as well as reactive litigation is needed.

Spare parts

Picking up on the spare parts issue, Francesca Portincasa of Automobili Lamborghini S.p.A. highlighted the importance of various IP rights, as well as product liability, for the automotive industry. “Are legal tools alone enough? The answer is no,” she said.

Francesca stressed that production development in the automotive industry takes many years. Deferring publication of a design allows the safeguarding of novelty during development and testing with appropriate camouflage. However, the risk of leaks is increasing, meaning that novelty can be lost and enforcement can be weaker. In New Zealand, for example, a design application was refused after photos were posted online; in another case, the North Macedonia IP office published a design notwithstanding the request for deferral.

“In the automotive sector, IP protection requires cooperation between different functions,” said Francesca. “It is not only about securing rights but managing timing, information and risk.”

Three tensions

Finally, Gordon Humphreys, Chairperson of the 1st and 3rd Boards of Appeal at EUIPO, presented some recent Board of Appeal case law. He argued that design law is “increasingly living at the intersection of three tensions”: appearance versus function (how much design freedom creators have when constrained by technical functions); digital evidence versus what counts as legal proof; and fair competition versus abusive tactics. He highlighted the following cases:

• Case R2089/2024-3 Lidl v Gusta Garden: a design for a modular plant container was held valid as online evidence of earlier disclosure was not clear or reliable and was therefore inconclusive. “It’s about whether the digital evidence could be properly traced,” said Gordon.
• Case R1483/2024-3 Building Slabs: a prior disclosure that was based on stolen designs by a former business partner was a misappropriation. This case underscores the importance of signing NDAs and post-employment restrictions to prevent this type of misappropriation, said Gordon: prior art is not just about what exists but how it came into existence.
• Case R1800/2025-3 Breathing Device/Nasal Aspirator: a design was not purely functional as the invalidity applicant had not proved that all aspects of the design were solely dictated by technical necessity; there was some margin for showing the designer still had room for aesthetic freedom. The lesson is that functionality is a high bar: invalidity applicants arguing functionality need to prove the lack of design freedom.

Summing up, said Gordon: “The devil is in the detail – and in the proof.”

Look out for further reports from the Conference on the MARQUES Class 46 blog. You can find out more about the Conference on the EUIPO website here. Photos taken by MARQUES editor James Nurton