• Our People
  • Global Presence
  • Regions
    • Asia
    • Europe
    • Americas
  • Offices
    • Canada
      • Ottawa
      • Toronto
    • China
      • Beijing
      • Hong Kong
    • Luxembourg
    • Malaysia
    • Singapore
    • UK
      • Aberdeen
      • Birmingham
      • Cambridge
      • Edinburgh
      • Glasgow
      • London
      • Manchester
      • Oxford
  • Client liaison
    • Japan
    • Korea
  • Expertise
  • Services
    • Patents
    • Brands & Trade Marks
    • Designs
    • Litigation & Dispute Resolution
    • Commercial IP & Contracts
    • Due Diligence
    • Freedom to Operate
    • EPO Patent Oppositions
    • European Patent Validations
    • Anti-counterfeiting
    • Open Source & Third Party Code
  • Sectors
    • Digital Transformation
      • 3D Printing
      • Artificial Intelligence
      • Blockchain
      • Data & Connectivity
      • Extended Reality
      • Industry 4.0
    • Energy & Environment
    • Life Sciences
    • Agritech
    • Medical Technologies
    • Chemistry
    • Transport
    • Entertainment & Creative Industries
    • Food & Drink
    • Fashion & Retail
    • Universities & Research Bodies
    • Start-ups & Spin-outs
      • Creating value for start-ups
      • The IP driven start-up
    • Financial Services
  • About Us
    • Working with us
    • Awards
    • Corporate & Social Responsibility
    • Diversity & Inclusion
    • Careers
  • Insights
    • Articles
    • News
    • Events
    • Resources
    • Unified Patent Court hub
    • Beyond Brexit: European trade mark hub
    • M&C Reacts
  • Contact Us
Marks & Clerk logo
Marks & Clerk logo
Contact Us
Language
English 中文(简体)
Our People
Global Presence
Regions
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Americas
Offices
  • Canada
    • Ottawa
    • Toronto
  • China
    • Beijing
    • Hong Kong
  • Luxembourg
  • Malaysia
  • Singapore
  • UK
    • Aberdeen
    • Birmingham
    • Cambridge
    • Edinburgh
    • Glasgow
    • London
    • Manchester
    • Oxford
Client liaison
  • Japan
  • Korea
Expertise
Services
  • Patents
  • Brands & Trade Marks
  • Designs
  • Litigation & Dispute Resolution
  • Commercial IP & Contracts
  • Due Diligence
  • Freedom to Operate
  • EPO Patent Oppositions
  • European Patent Validations
  • Anti-counterfeiting
  • Open Source & Third Party Code
Sectors
  • Digital Transformation
    • 3D Printing
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • Blockchain
    • Data & Connectivity
    • Extended Reality
    • Industry 4.0
  • Energy & Environment
  • Life Sciences
  • Agritech
  • Medical Technologies
  • Chemistry
  • Transport
  • Entertainment & Creative Industries
  • Food & Drink
  • Fashion & Retail
  • Universities & Research Bodies
  • Start-ups & Spin-outs
    • Creating value for start-ups
    • The IP driven start-up
  • Financial Services
About Us
  • Working with us
  • Awards
  • Corporate & Social Responsibility
  • Diversity & Inclusion
  • Careers
Insights
  • Articles
  • News
  • Events
  • Resources
  • Unified Patent Court hub
  • Beyond Brexit: European trade mark hub
  • M&C Reacts

Shanghai Intellectual Property Court ruled for Casio’s calculator design

21 June 2021
Print
Share

On 23 April 2021, the Shanghai Intellectual Property Court (“Court”) announced judgments for ten cases involving intellectual property disputes including, inter alia, a design patent infringement case. The Court found that infringement was established, granting an injunction against future infringement and a monetary damage of RMB 200,000. The comments of the Court in this case shed some light on how similar designs are to be determined in the field of electronic calculators.

The plaintiff in this case is Casio Computer Co., Ltd. (“Casio”). The design at issue is Chinese Patent No. ZL201430094864.5, entitled “Electronic Calculator”, granted to Casio in 2014. The defendants are Shantou Eates Electronic Industrial Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Zongtong Industrial Co., Ltd. The former is the manufacturer of the allegedly infringing calculator, and the latter is the seller thereof. For ease of reference, the allegedly infringing calculator and the design at issue are reproduced below:

Design drawing of Casio calculator alongside photograph of allegedly infringing calculator - navigation keys are highlighted with a red boxLeft: Casio calculator design. Right: allegedly infringing design. Image provided by IP ForeFront

According to the Court, the front side of a calculator is the part that provides the most significant visual impact to a consumer. In respect of the design of the front side, the Court finds there is still certain degree of freedom for designers in terms of the specific shape of the functional keys and the layout thereof. As such, the layout of the keys in the design at issue is not necessarily a conventional design.

The Court concludes that the design of the allegedly infringing calculator and the design at issue constitute similar designs, in that the design of the allegedly infringing calculator is essentially the same as the design at issue in terms of the overall visual impacts they make. In reaching its conclusion, the Court specifically comments on the design of navigation keys (highlighted in red in the picture above). According to the Court, whilst the navigation key of the allegedly infringing calculator differs from that of the design at issue, the difference is merely an insignificant modification in view of its location and proportion to other parts of the calculators. Accordingly, the Court finds that the navigation key of the allegedly infringing calculator cannot distinguish it from the design at issue.

Next Story
  • InterDigital v Lenovo: The latest FRAND judgment
  • Cambridge: City of Innovation - The 'beer summit' that generated a genomic revolution
  • IP protection in collaborations: "Just Do It"
  • How Kristina Milbourn is breaking the mould and making a difference
  • To see, or not to see?
More insights

Latest Insights

Chemistry
Article
- 24 March 2023

Preliminary position on priority published

As we reported in early 2022, the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the EPO are considering two pending referrals (G1/22 and G2/22) regarding the question of entitlement to priority. A hearing has now been set for 26 May 2023, and the Enlarged Board have now issued a preliminary opinion setting out the points to be discussed.
Read more
Quantum computing
Article
- 22 March 2023

International patent insights on quantum computing

The latest patent insight report from the European Patent Office (EPO) looks at the trends in patent filings for quantum computing, and has uncovered some interesting findings.
Read more
Article
- 22 March 2023

InterDigital v Lenovo: The latest FRAND judgment

On 16 March 2023, Mr Justice Mellor handed down the latest FRAND judgment: InterDigital v Lenovo. The case concerned a dispute between InterDigital and Lenovo as to the terms on which Lenovo should take a licence to InterDigital’s portfolio of patents which had been declared essential to the European Telecommunications Standard Institute (ETSI) Standards.
Read more
Marks & Clerk logo (white)
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Notice
  • Cookies
  • Legal Notices
  • Press Enquiries
  • Lexology
  • Mondaq