United States: Combine And Conquer: How The Synthesis Of Design Patent And Trade Dress Achieve Maximum Protection For Your Product Design

Have you ever been frustrated with free-riders? Let's look at a simple example. You are a General Counsel at a luxury fashion house. Your fashion house is introducing a new handbag that is expected to create more hype than the Hermes BIRKIN. The newly-launched handbag in a matter of several months becomes a huge hit among fashionistas. And copycats across the globe start making their own versions of the handbag. What can you do about this? Copyright, which grants protection to the author from the moment of creation, will most likely not cover the shape of the handbag because the shape, no matter how original and creative, is not conceptually separable from the underlying utilitarian aspects of the handbag design. A suit for trade dress infringement is probably not an option either, since you'll be required to demonstrate that the consuming public has come to exclusively associate the shape of the handbag with your company. And how can consumers develop such an association when the copycats start flooding the market with their own look-alike versions the moment your original walks the runway? So do you tell the CEO of your fashion house that the battle is lost? Not so fast. Securing a design patent is a way to prevent copycats from appropriating your design the moment your purses hit the press. And more importantly, a design patent gives you the most valuable gift of all—time to develop secondary meaning that allows you to secure perpetual trade dress protection.

The Different Coverage and Purposes of Design Patent and Trade Dress Protection

Dual trade dress and design patent protection can exist when the shape of the product is ornamental and also serves to distinguish the source of the goods to consumers.1 And brand owners can continue to protect their trade dress from infringement even after the design patent expires. Existence of a design patent, "rather than detracting from a claim of trademark, may support such a claim" because "it may be presumptive evidence of non-functionality," necessary to obtain trade dress protection.2

Created to promote progress in decorative arts and to reward inventors, design patents protect non-functional, ornamental features of "an article of manufacture."3 Design patents for non-obvious novel ornamental configurations are granted for a period of fourteen years. With advanced planning and the payment of additional fees, issuance of a design patent can take as little as three to six months (the time between runway shows and bringing the product to market). And, unlike trademark registration with the USPTO and actions under the Lanham Act, there is no requirement to use the product design in commerce in order to secure a design patent or sue for patent infringement.

Trade dress, on the other hand, "involves the total image of a product and may include features such as size, shape, color or color combinations, texture, graphics, or even particular sales techniques."4 Similar to design patents, trademark law protects only non-functional product design trade dress. In trademark parlance, a product feature is functional "if it is essential to the use or purpose of the article or if it affects the cost and quality of the article."5

While both trade dress and design patents cover non-functional features of product configurations, there are several fundamental differences between the two forms of protection. These differences can be explained by looking at the distinct goals of patent law, which grants an exclusive property right for a limited time to an inventor, and trademark law, which is a species of consumer protection law. Since trademark law is aimed at preventing consumer confusion, product design trade dress protection can last as long as the design is used in commerce and identifies the source of goods to consumers.

Infringement of the design patent is found when an ordinary observer, giving the attention of a purchaser, perceives the patented and the accused designs as substantially the same, in light of the prior art.6 In an action for trade dress infringement, on the other hand, the plaintiff has to prove that it owns a protectable product design trade dress and that the use of similar trade dress by a defendant creates likelihood of consumer confusion. Both design patent and trade dress infringement focus on the impressions of the ordinary consumer—and not the expert—in evaluating the similarity (or confusing similarity) of the respective designs. But unlike the test for trade dress infringement which focuses on marketplace realities, such as acquired distinctiveness and consumer confusion, the focus of the design patent infringement action is similarity to the design features shown in the design patent drawings, and not similarity to the patentee's "commercial embodiment" of the design.7

Since unlike in the patent arena, trade dress rights can exist under common law, and do not derive exclusively from a federal registration, the evidentiary requirements of demonstrating protectable trade dress rights (particularly for product design as contrasted with product packaging) can be involved. In Wal-Mart v. Samara Bros., the Supreme Court differentiated between the evidentiary showing required to demonstrate protection for the two different types of trade dress—product packaging (the box, bottle, or container for the product, or labels thereon) and product design (the configuration of the product itself). Contending that consumers are less inclined to recognize product design as a source identifier, the Court held that product design trade dress can never be inherently distinctive and thus is only protectable upon a showing of secondary meaning. In evaluating whether product design trade dress has acquired secondary meaning, the courts will look at such factors as the length of use, commercial success of the product, "look for" advertising directing consumers to focus on the elements of the claimed trade dress, survey evidence, and advertising expenditures. Only if a plaintiff is successful in demonstrating that its product design trade dress has acquired secondary meaning (and, accordingly, is entitled to trade dress protection), will the court consider the issue of likelihood of confusion. While likelihood of confusion tests differ slightly depending on jurisdiction, generally the courts will consider the strength of the plaintiff's trade dress, the similarity of the plaintiff's trade dress and the defendant's trade dress, the proximity of goods, the level of purchaser care, the marketing channels utilized by both parties, the intent of the defendant in selecting its trade dress, the evidence of actual confusion, and likelihood of expansion of the product lines.8

The Majority View Holds That Design Patent and Trade Dress Protection Can Coexist

While the prevailing view is that trade dress protection is available for designs that were once covered by a design patent upon showing of secondary meaning, some courts have questioned the right of the trademark owner to claim secondary meaning when such secondary meaning was established solely due to the exclusive design patent protection. For example, in Winning Ways, Inc. v. Holloway Sportswear Inc.9, the court noted that "[g]ranting trade dress protection to an item for which a patent has expired creates tension because the product may have obtained secondary meaning precisely because the product was patented." Winning Ways represents the minority viewpoint, and brand owners can generally be certain that most courts will enjoin infringement of product design trade dress covered by an expired design patent so long as this trade dress acquired secondary meaning.

In In re Mogen David Wine Corp., where the existence of the design patent was held not to preclude the applicant from obtaining registration on the Principal Register for the shape of its wine bottle, the court observed that "[t]rademark rights . . . which happen to continue beyond the expiration of a design patent do not 'extend' the patent monopoly" because patent and trademark rights "exist independently of, under different law and for different reasons."10

In Kohler Co. v. Moen, Inc.11, Moen obtained a trademark registration for its LEGEND kitchen faucet and the appearance of the handle used on the LEGEND and other faucets. Kohler opposed the registration, arguing that granting trademark protection to product designs impermissibly conflicts with the Patent Clause of the U.S. Constitution.12 In rejecting Kohler's arguments, the court said:

The trademark owner has an indefinite term of protection, it is true, but in an infringement suit must also prove secondary meaning and likelihood of confusion, which the owner of the design patent need not do; there is therefore no necessary inconsistency between two modes of protection.13

The court noted that while a design patent grants a fourteen-year monopoly "by giving the patentee the exclusive right to make and sell the innovation, a trademark gives the owner only the right to preclude others from using the mark when such use is likely to cause confusion or to deceive."14 Unlike patents, trademarks are not monopolies because others are allowed to produce similar designs so long as there is no likelihood of consumer confusion.15

Ferrari s.p.a. Esecizio Fabriche Automobili E Corse v. Roberts16 suggests that protection can be granted to the trademark owner even if there is no confusion at the point of sale. In Ferrari, the defendant manufactured fiberglass kits that replicated the exterior features of Ferrari's Daytona Spyder and Testarossa automobiles.17 The defendant argued that Daytona Spyder and Testarossa designs could not be protected under the Lanham Act because automobile designs are to be protected from copying only pursuant to the design patent statute.18 Rejecting the defendant's argument, the court stated that "Lanham Act protection is available to designs which also might have been covered by design patents so long as the designs have acquired secondary meaning."19 The defendant also argued that he did not violate the Lanham Act because he informed purchasers that his kits were not genuine Ferraris but significantly cheaper replicas and, thus, there was no confusion at the point of sale.20 Since "Congress intended to protect the reputation of the manufacturer as well as to protect the purchasers" and since Ferrari's reputation could be damaged by the marketing of replicas, the court allowed recovery even in the absence of point of sale confusion.21

What All of This Means For the Brand Owner

Brand owners can obtain design patent protection for their product designs so long as the design is not entirely functional, and is novel, and non-obvious. Design patent secures for their owner a fourteen-year right to exclude others from making, using, selling or importing the claimed product and, thus, allows time to build up secondary meaning necessary to acquire product design trade dress protection. Trade dress protection can last for as long as product design trade dress remains in use and continues to identify the source of goods to consumers. Brand owners can be almost certain that they will be able to enjoin competitors from using confusingly similar trade dress after the term of the design patent expires.

Authors would like to thank Anna Balichina, a law clerk with the firm for her assistance in preparing this article.


1 Thomas McCarthy, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 7:91 (4th ed. 2008).

2 Id. § 6:11.

3 35 U.S.C.A. § 171.

4 Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc., 505 U.S. 763, 765 (1992).

5 TrafFix Devices, Inc. v. Marketing Displays, Inc., 532 U.S. 23, 24 (2001).

6 Gorham v. White, 81 U.S. 511 (1871) as modified by Egyptian Goddess, Inc. v. Swisa, Inc., 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 20104, Case No. 2006-1562 (Fed. Cir. Sep. 22, 2008).

7 Sun Hill Indus. v. Easter Unlimited, 33 USPQ2d 1925, 1927, reh'g en banc denied, 48 F.3d 1193 (Fed. Cir. 1995).

8 See, e.g., AMF Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats, 599 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1979).

9 37 USPQ2d 1462, 1464 (D.C. Kan. 1995).

10 In re Mogen David Wine Corp., 140 USPQ 575, 579 (C.C.P.A. 1964).

11 29 USPQ2d 1241 (7th Cir. 1993).

12 Id. at 1244.

13 Id. at 1246 (citing W.T. Rogers Co. v. Keene, 778 F.2d 334, 337 (7th Cir. 1985)).

14 Id.

15 Id. at 1250.

16 20 USPQ2d 1001 (6th Cir. 1991).

17 Id. at 1004.

18 Id. at 1006.

19 Id. at 1007.

20 Id. at 1009.

21 Id. at 1010.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
12 Nov 2018, Speaking Engagement, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Finnegan partner Anthony Tridico will lead Forum Institute for Management’s course comparing patent law in the United States and Europe.

13 Nov 2018, Conference, Washington, DC, United States

Finnegan is an Event sponsor of the PTAB Bar Association Thought Leader Summit. The program will take place at the Westin Hotel in Alexandria, Virginia.

13 Nov 2018, Conference, California, United States

Finnegan is a Lunch sponsor of the fifth annual Corporate IP Strategy Conference, hosted by Unified Patents.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions