This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-35762610
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Version 3 | Version 4 |
---|---|
Trunki loses ride-on animal suitcase court case | Trunki loses ride-on animal suitcase court case |
(35 minutes later) | |
The founder of Trunki suitcases has predicted "chaos" after his company lost a court battle with a rival over product design. | The founder of Trunki suitcases has predicted "chaos" after his company lost a court battle with a rival over product design. |
Magmatic - which sells the children's ride-on cases decorated to look like animals or insects - lost out in a Supreme Court ruling. | Magmatic - which sells the children's ride-on cases decorated to look like animals or insects - lost out in a Supreme Court ruling. |
The court said PMS International's Kiddee Case range didn't infringe registered design rights. | The court said PMS International's Kiddee Case range didn't infringe registered design rights. |
Rob Law, creator and CEO of Trunki, tweeted he was "devastated". | Rob Law, creator and CEO of Trunki, tweeted he was "devastated". |
He added he was "bewildered by this judgment, not just for ourselves but for the huge wave of uncertainty it brings to designers in Britain". | He added he was "bewildered by this judgment, not just for ourselves but for the huge wave of uncertainty it brings to designers in Britain". |
The design battle had already gone through the High Court, which backed Bristol-based Magmatic, and the Court of Appeal, which supported PMS International. | The design battle had already gone through the High Court, which backed Bristol-based Magmatic, and the Court of Appeal, which supported PMS International. |
In its ruling on Wednesday, the Supreme Court backed the Court of Appeal. | In its ruling on Wednesday, the Supreme Court backed the Court of Appeal. |
Supreme Court Justice Lord Neuberger said Trunki was "both original and clever" and he said it "appears clear" the Kiddee Case had been conceived "as a result of seeing a Trunki and discovering that a discount model was not available". | Supreme Court Justice Lord Neuberger said Trunki was "both original and clever" and he said it "appears clear" the Kiddee Case had been conceived "as a result of seeing a Trunki and discovering that a discount model was not available". |
But he said: "Unfortunately for Magmatic, however, this appeal is not concerned with an idea or an invention, but with a design." | But he said: "Unfortunately for Magmatic, however, this appeal is not concerned with an idea or an invention, but with a design." |
'Overall impression' | 'Overall impression' |
The court said design law was based on the "overall impression created by a design", which in Trunki's case was "an animal with horns". | The court said design law was based on the "overall impression created by a design", which in Trunki's case was "an animal with horns". |
It said this was "significantly different from the impression made by the Kiddee Case, which were either an insect with antennae or an animal with ears". | It said this was "significantly different from the impression made by the Kiddee Case, which were either an insect with antennae or an animal with ears". |
But Mr Law tweeted: "The law is meant to be about certainty. But this decision will create chaos and confusion among Britain's design community". | But Mr Law tweeted: "The law is meant to be about certainty. But this decision will create chaos and confusion among Britain's design community". |
Magmatic registered its ride-on suitcase design in October 2003 as six computer-generated images. | Magmatic registered its ride-on suitcase design in October 2003 as six computer-generated images. |
#ProtectYourDesign | |
Business leaders and celebrities were among those to support the rights of British business as the Trunki case moved through the courts. | |
The #ProtectYourDesign Twitter campaign was launched by Trunki with the aim of getting "more robust protection" for designers | |
It gathered the support of the likes of Habitat founder Sir Terence Conran, Grand Designs presenter Kevin McCloud, Brompton Bikes boss Will Butler-Adams and Innocent Drinks co-founder Adam Balon. | |
Trunki said: "This battle has been hugely draining for us, both financially and emotionally. But It's no longer just a fight to protect Trunki." | |
It added: "Under this ruling the rights of more than 350,000 creative British businesses would be undermined and designers left vulnerable to flagrant design infringement." | |
In 2006 Mr Law appeared on BBC Two show Dragons' Den in 2006, unsuccessfully seeking investment for his Trunki case. | In 2006 Mr Law appeared on BBC Two show Dragons' Den in 2006, unsuccessfully seeking investment for his Trunki case. |
After he was rejected by the Dragons, he went on to sell more than two million of the suitcases in more than 60 countries. | After he was rejected by the Dragons, he went on to sell more than two million of the suitcases in more than 60 countries. |
Lawyer Mike Gardner, a partner at law firm Wedlake Bell, said the case showed how difficult it could be for businesses when design law protected the appearance of products rather than ideas. | Lawyer Mike Gardner, a partner at law firm Wedlake Bell, said the case showed how difficult it could be for businesses when design law protected the appearance of products rather than ideas. |
He said: "Magmatic's registered design showed computer-aided drawings of the Trunki which included some shading and dark colours for the wheels. | He said: "Magmatic's registered design showed computer-aided drawings of the Trunki which included some shading and dark colours for the wheels. |
"These had to be taken as part of the design and not ignored as Magmatic contended." | "These had to be taken as part of the design and not ignored as Magmatic contended." |
But Michael Moore, partner at intellectual property law firm Marks & Clerk, said judges had to "strike a balance between fair protection and free competition". | But Michael Moore, partner at intellectual property law firm Marks & Clerk, said judges had to "strike a balance between fair protection and free competition". |