August 2017

If the outer package of a product is designed by incorporating elements such as lines and graphics and arranged in general with other wordings, it is deemed an artistic work protected under the Copyright Act(Taiwan)

2016.10.20
Ankwei Chen

The Intellectual Property Court rendered the 105-Min-Zhu-Shang-4 Civil Decision on October 20, 2016 (the "Decision") in which it held that if the outer package of a product is designed by incorporating elements such as lines and graphics and arranged in general with other wordings, it is deemed an artistic work protected under the Copyright Act.

Appellant sells ÒExforgeÓ products in Taiwan. The packaging for AppelleeÕs product Asartan is alleged by Appellant as possessing substantial similarity in design with that of ExforgeÕs in terms of colors and arrangement used. Appellant sought compensation for copyright infringement and request for destruction of AppelleeÕs infringing items.

According to the Decision, although the artistic work at issue is outer product packaging, the arrangement of blue, white, orange and khaki colors, when designed as a whole for display aesthetics with elements such as lines and graphics, the result is no longer merely an arrangement of colors; in such fusion of lines and image elements and the overall design with other text, there is sufficient display of the creatorÕs artistic skill and independent thinking to meet the requirement of putting aesthetics as the key characteristic of the artwork. Therefore, the Exforge product outer package design is an artistic work protectable under the Copyright Act.

However, while the Exforge packaging design employs substantial use of straight lines and rectangular shapes, with the front and back using different compositions, AppelleeÕs Asartan product uses curves and ovals, so there is no substantial similarity. Further, the Exforge design places the name on the right in black and white text, while Asartan places the name of the pharmaceutical in the middle and in blue, there is thus also no similarity there. As such, Appellee did not infringe on AppellantÕs artistic work, and this part of the appeal was rejected.

本网站上所有资料内容(「内容」)均属理慈国际科技法律事务所所有。本所保留所有权利,除非获得本所事前许可外,均不得以任何形式或以任何方式重制、下载、散布、发行或移转本网站上之内容。

所有内容仅供作参考且非为特定议题或具体个案之法律或专业建议。所有内容未必为最新法律及法规之发展,本所及其编辑群不保证内容之正确性,并明示声明不须对任何人就信赖使用本网站上全部或部分之内容,而据此所为或经许可而为或略而未为之结果负担任何及全部之责任。撰稿作者之观点不代表本所之立场。如有任何建议或疑义,请与本所联系。

作者

Katty
Katty