[The IPKat] [Guest post] Time to redesigns designs: the UK government launches a wide-ranging consultation

[Eleonora Rosati]

[Guest post] Time to redesigns designs: the UK government launches a wide-ranging consultation

 Eleonora Rosati Thursday, September 25, 2025 - copyright, Darren Meale, designs, Guest post, IP policy, UK

Former GuestKat Darren Meale (Simmons & Simmons) is bringing IPKat readers an analysis of the recently launched public consultation on the potential review of the UK design and copyright system. Here's what Darren has to say:

Time to redesigns designs: the UK government launches a wide-ranging consultation

by Darren Meale

IPKat-approved design, seemingly inspired by Canova's Pauline Bonaparte

The government via the UKIPO is currently consulting on potentially wide-ranging changes to UK design (and copyright) law. Its consultation was published on 4 September and is open until 27 November 2025. You can read it here. It is a hefty document – 28,000 words which would get you more than a third of the way through the first Harry Potter. Here is the briefest of summaries for those with other novels to read.

1. New approach likely on examination and prior art searches

UK designs are currently registered without a search by the UKIPO on novelty or individual character. So no prior art search. The consultation notes that this simple system makes it easy to register designs in bad faith, and proposes three options: no change; a power for a search at an examiner’s discretion; or a two-stage system whereby a search and exam is required before a design can be enforced (like that in Australia). The government has indicated it does not like option 1, and reading between the lines option 3 seems the front runner.

2. Bad faith proposed to be a basis for objection

There is a strong indication that bad faith will become an explicit basis to reject a design application, to cover situations including where a third party applies for a design for a well-known product not its own. This seems a bit of a no-brainer although given the lack of examination (even if the two-stage system is introduced), it was not clear to me how bad faith would be policed/monitored, although the consultation optimistically talks of the development of “AI tools”.

3. Opposition to designs? 

There is no current opposition system for designs, unlike trade marks. Without indicating any particular preference, the government is consulting on whether to introduce a two month pre- or post-registration opposition period, or a pre-registration observation period (or make no changes).

4. Longer deferment period? 

Deferring a design’s publication (and registration) lets you protect it without initially revealing it to the public. The current period is 12 months (although this is not set out in statute) in contrast to the EUIPO’s 30 month period. The government’s preference is to meet in the middle and move to 18 months, starting from the filing date or priority date if there is one.

5. Make it easier to register animated designs and GUIs

A range of options is considered to make this easier including: clarifying the existing law to be clear on what is permitted; increasing the range of file formats allowed; and adding a public description.

6. Crackdown on AI-made designs

For some reason, the government is worried about allowing the registration of a design created by AI. Given that such a design will only come about at the direction of a human who will then decide it is worthy of paying to protect it, I do not understand the concern. Currently a design still qualifies for protection even if AI-generated, but the government’s preferred option is to remove this protection. I might have missed the point on this, but given that Gen-AI is already a part of many commercially available design tools (at least according to my quick scan of the big names), this might have unintended consequences.

7. “Simplifying” design law

UK design law has always been complex, with a patchwork of overlapping rights. The government wants to do something about this. One option considered is to create a single unregistered design framework protecting both aesthetic aspects such as appearance and more functional elements of shape and configuration, in place of the existing split between supplementary unregistered design (SUD) which lasts three years (and arose out of Brexit to replicate its EU equivalent) and good old fashioned UK unregistered design (design right) (UKUDDR) which lasts 10-15 years.

8. Changes to copyright law

One has to read a long way into the consultation document to get to this section, which proposes some potentially significant reworkings of copyright law. Under consideration are removing works of artistic craftmanship from the scope of protection; (finally) providing a proper definition of them; providing a new definition of originality in relation to design articles; changing the exceptions to copyright law in areas of potential overlap with designs; and even the reintroduction of section 52 CDPA. These are BIG topics to stick in at the end(ish) of the consultation, on which commentators and academics could write whole books.

9. Addressing the impact of the lack of mutual recognition of design disclosure post-Brexit

A tricky “Brexit cocked this right up” topic on which the government has no preferred option, although it does discount reaching a proper agreement with the EU on it (that’s it, take back control, you show ‘em!).

For the avoidance of doubt, the author of this blog post was/is very much a human and no AI (bar a spell-checker) was used in its creation.

Do you want to reuse the IPKat content? Please refer to our 'Policies' section. If you have any queries or requests for permission, please get in touch with the IPKat team.