![\"\"](\"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/model-car-2091363_1920.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Porsche has always been imagined as the antagonist of the Italian Ferrari. It is one of the most famous motoring manufacturers in the world and one of\u00a0its iconic models is the 911 sports car, first being produced in 1963.<\/p>\n
The 911 is one of the few vehicles to have been continually produced since the 1960s, having been updated and modified throughout its lifetime but still preserves much of its original design<\/a> today.<\/p>\n That’s what the Court of Justice of the European Union believes too.<\/p>\n Indeed, the EU Court of Justice issued two judgements on the cancellation of design protection<\/a> for the famous Porsche Model 911 (CJEU, EU:T:2019:380 and EU:T:2019:377) against a first design filed in 2004 and a second design filed in 2010 for restyled versions of the 911 sport\u2019s car.<\/p>\n Will\u00a0these decisions revolutionise the automotive industry? Is there anyone who has never played with a toy car reproducing the most famous supercars in the world?<\/p>\n Well, if you think that\u00a0toy manufacturers pay millions each year in royalties for reproducing the most iconic car in the world you can understand the extent of this decisions.<\/p>\n The toy manufacturer Autec, requested a declaration of invalidity<\/a>, arguing that the contested designs were similar to the original Porsche 911 car, citing press releases as well a two earlier<\/p>\n German models of the 90\u2019\u00a0 Initially, the EUIPO\u2019s cancellation division invalidated the designs owing to a lack of\u00a0individual character. The decisions of cancellation of the two \u00a0Community designs\u00a0(No1230593-0001\u00a0and No 198387-0001) \u00a0was confirmed by the Board of Appeal and finally by the EU General Court that dismissed Porsche\u2019s complaint (Judgements of the European Court\u00a0EU:T:2019:380<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0EU:T:2019:377<\/u>).<\/p>\n In its decision the\u00a0European Court therefore reviewed the aspects\u00a0of \u201cinformed user\u201d, \u201cfreedom of the designer\u201d and \u201coverall impression as a whole\u201d.<\/p>\n Firstly, the Court refused to select as \u201cinformed user\u201d a figure too focused on the specific case (e.g. user of a Porsche 911 car) but chose instead in general an informed user of the product category of cars. The Court thus denied that the informed user may put a higher attention to particulars when analysing a Porsche 911 car as claimed by Porsche.<\/p>\n In its defence, Porsche argued that it had limited freedom of design with respect\u00a0to the specific 911\u00a0car,\u00a0not only with regard to the design of technical and statutory features but also because of the \u201cmarket\u2019s expectations\u201d about that iconic product. The Court, on the contrary, confirmed\u00a0what stated\u00a0 by the Board of Appeal\u00a0 that\u00a0potential expectations of the market or specific design trends do not constitute relevant restrictions on the \u201cdesigner\u2019s degree of freedom\u201d.<\/p>\n When comparing the overall impressions of the conflicting designs, the Court considered the shape of the general structure was so similar that the differences in the optional details (lamps, mirrors, bumpers) were irrelevant. Accordingly, the overall impressions produced on the informed user by the conflicting models were not substantially different.<\/p>\n Porsche\u2019s action was therefore dismissed by the EU General Court in both proceedings and the invalidity of the design protection for the Porsche 911 was confirmed.<\/p>\n So that’s it, end of story? We are ready to bet in a reaction from Porsche.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","area":[14],"news-argomento":[40],"news-tipologia":[43],"class_list":["post-2554","approfondimenti","type-approfondimenti","status-publish","hentry","area-brand-protection","news-argomento-design-en","news-tipologia-insights"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/approfondimenti\/2554","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/approfondimenti"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/approfondimenti"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/approfondimenti\/2554\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2554"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"area","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/area?post=2554"},{"taxonomy":"news-argomento","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news-argomento?post=2554"},{"taxonomy":"news-tipologia","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news-tipologia?post=2554"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Porsche2.png\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Porsche3.jpg\")
\u00a0and\u00a0![\"\"](\"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Porsche4.jpg\")
\u00a0for the first invalidity action and two Community Design registrations of 2007\u00a0![\"\"](\"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Porsche5.png\")
\u00a0and 2008\u00a0![\"\"](\"https:\/\/barzano-zanardo.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Porsche6.png\")
for the second invalidity action.<\/p>\n