WHAT WE MONITOR

DESIGNS

Image

Overview

An industrial design right is an intellectual property right that protects the visual design of objects. It encompasses the creation of a shape, configuration, or composition of pattern or colour, or a combination of pattern and colour in three-dimensional form that possesses aesthetic value. Our service offers searches and checks for similar design patterns within our database.

FAQ's

This service will be particularly beneficial for design owners and entities planning to register industrial and other designs.
Each design is taxonomized based on Locarno's classification for better registration industrial designs. Our service verifies each new design and its classification and then compares the specific features and characteristics of the design with the customer's design. Automatic verification is performed using Vision ML and looks for elements of similarity between designs. This makes it possible to identify copycats or imitations.
Yes, absolutely. Thanks to this service, you can avoid potential objections in the design registration process. It will help you steer clear of using design features belonging to other industrial design owners.
Machine learning is an application of artificial intelligence (AI) that equips systems with the ability to learn automatically and improve from experience without being explicitly programmed. Machine learning focuses on developing computer programmes that can access data and utilise it to learn independently.
After receiving the reference number, please register on the web portal. Upon successful registration, the service will be activated for you. The first information outputs will be displayed after a few hours.

News

  • Trademark Refusal for 'Made in China' Figurative Mark Highlights Geographic Descriptiveness Hurdles


    Trademark Refusal for 'Made in China' Figurative Mark Highlights Geographic Descriptiveness Hurdles

    EUIPO has formally rejected the registration of a figurative mark resembling the phrase 'Made in China', submitted by Jingdezhen Ceramic Culture Tourism Holding Group, citing that the sign is merely descriptive and lacks distinctiveness. Despite containing stylised elements such as a traditional Chinese house and red Chinese characters, the mark was found to communicate a clear and direct reference to the geographical origin of the goods—primarily household ceramics and glassware. The Office reasoned that the figurative components did not mitigate the descriptive nature of the term, rendering it incapable of fulfilling the essential function of a trade mark. The applicant failed to contest the objection, leading to a definitive refusal. The case underscores the limitations on registering terms perceived as indicating origin rather than source branding. Following visualisation shows detail info on rejected 'Made in China' trademark.


    30/05/2025

  • An update to our design & design patterns report is now available

      To access it, please log in to your account and go to the "Design" section. If you're not registered yet, simply sign up with your reference number.


    29/05/2025

  • AXA Succeeds in EUIPO Opposition Against ‘AXA MEDICA’ Over Risk of Consumer Confusion in Medical Services


    AXA Succeeds in EUIPO Opposition Against ‘AXA MEDICA’ Over Risk of Consumer Confusion in Medical Services

    In a ruling issued on 23 May 2025, the EUIPO Opposition Division upheld AXA S.A.’s opposition against the figurative trademark application ‘AXA MEDICA’, filed by Italy-based Axa Medica S.R.L., rejecting the application in its entirety. The case centred on the likelihood of confusion, with the Office concluding that the contested medical and healthcare services were identical or highly similar to those covered by AXA’s earlier EU trademark registration. While the applicant argued that the inclusion of terms like 'Medica', 'Prevenzione', 'Diagnosi', and 'Cura' distinguished the mark, the Office found such additions merely descriptive and incapable of offsetting the dominant presence of the word ‘AXA’. Visually and aurally, the shared use of ‘AXA’—placed at the beginning of both signs—was deemed the primary driver of potential confusion. The figurative atom symbol in the contested mark was considered decorative and secondary to the verbal elements. Following visualisation shows detailed information on the rejected ‘AXA MEDICA’ trademark, illustrating the scope of its claimed services and the graphical composition that failed to differentiate it from the well-established AXA brand.


    27/05/2025