In the world of upholstered furniture, crafting pieces with unique flair hinges not just on premium materials like leather and fabric, but also on the artistry embedded in detailed design blueprints. Yet, amid fierce battles in the raw materials arena, some suppliers take a darker path—snatching original design sketches without permission. These stolen designs are then handed out to furniture makers, sometimes for free or at bargain prices, fueling a shadow market of pirated furniture styles. This cunning move boosts their leather and fabric sales while lining their pockets unfairly. Interestingly, it’s often the material suppliers, rather than the furniture creators themselves, who dive deepest into these infringement waters. Their unauthorized copying and spreading of design plans not only trample on patents but also fan the flames of furniture piracy across the industry.
The widespread piracy by material suppliers in China considerably restricts the market space for original designs. Designers who invest substantial resources in creating new furniture styles face significant challenges in sustaining their businesses. Therefore, addressing piracy by material suppliers and fostering a fair furniture market environment is essential for protecting and advancing the original design industry.
Judicial Challenges in Tackling the Infringement Chain of Product Design Drawings
Traditional enforcement efforts in the furniture industry typically focus on fixed manufacturing or sales activities. However, material suppliers who provide pirated design drawings to manufacturers do not directly engage in patent infringement acts such as manufacturing, selling, or offering for sale. Even when their actions are considered as “aiding patent infringement,” prosecuting such aiding behavior independently can be challenging. Including aiding infringement in evidence collection also increases the burden of proof for rights holders.
Copyright Protection: Core Criteria and Holding Material Suppliers Accountable
Are Product Design Drawings Recognized as Works under Copyright Law?
According to Article 2 of the Implementation Regulations of the Copyright Law of China, a work refers to original intellectual achievements in literature, art, and science that can be reproduced in a tangible form. Such works must demonstrate originality, artistic quality, reproducibility, and be tangible intellectual creations.
Product design drawings typically encompass furniture renderings, BOM lists, and production processes and dimensions (including wooden frame diagrams, padding procedures, base coating steps, sewing processes, fabric sheets, and sponge material lists). These elements primarily serve as technical production instructions. Their originality is generally reflected in structural breakdowns, material ratios, design proportions, and schematic illustrations. Legally, these qualify as “product design drawings” protected under Article 3 of the Copyright Law.
Does the Sale or Distribution of Product Design Drawings by Material Suppliers Constitute Copyright Infringement?
In judicial practice, courts apply the access plus substantial similarity standard to determine copyright infringement. For access, rights holders need only demonstrate the possibility that the infringer had contact with the claimed work. If the allegedly infringing work is identical or substantially similar to the original and the infringer cannot provide a legitimate defense, infringement is established.
In furniture design disputes, rights holders operate within the furniture design business, whereas infringer registered business scopes typically exclude design activities. Nonetheless, evidence shows that infringers actively sell or bundle product design drawings to furniture manufacturers, directly competing with rights holders. After the rights holder creates the work, the infringer likely had access to it. Regarding substantial similarity, infringers often distribute pirated designs at prices far below market value or free of charge. To minimize costs, infringers usually avoid significant modifications to the original designs, resulting in pirated versions that are nearly identical except for altered authorship marks.
Factors Influencing Compensation for Product Design Drawing Infringement
According to Article 25, Paragraph 2 of the Supreme Court Interpretation on Copyright Civil Disputes, courts consider factors such as the type of work, reasonable licensing fees, the nature of the infringement, and its consequences when determining compensation. Given the unique infringement patterns of product design drawings, compensation is generally based on statutory damages. These works involve considerable intellectual effort and possess high commercial value, typically priced between 3,000 to 5,000 RMB per copy. The infringer low-price sales severely undermine the market for original designs and represent the root of infringement, causing significant losses to rights holders. Therefore, compensation for product design drawing infringement should be set higher than for ordinary works.
Complementary Protection of Copyright and Patent Rights in Furniture Design Enforcement
In enforcing furniture design rights, copyright and patent protections address different aspects and scopes. Patents safeguard the industrial value of furniture products, while copyrights protect product design drawings as intellectual achievements in the scientific domain. These protections do not overlap but rather complement each other. Copyright protection serves as a vital supplement to patent enforcement, enabling more effective and comprehensive measures against intellectual property infringements at their source.
Please feel free to reach out liangwen@zhonglun.com, if you have any inquiries or require any support in this matter!