(1)The owner of design right in a design has the exclusive right to reproduce the design for commercial purposes—
(a)by making articles to that design, or
(b)by making a design document recording the design for the purpose of enabling such articles to be made.
(2)Reproduction of a design by making articles to the design means copying the design so as to produce articles exactly or substantially to that design, and references in this Part to making articles to a design shall be construed accordingly.
(3)Design right is infringed by a person who without the licence of the design right owner does, or authorises another to do, anything which by virtue of this section is the exclusive right of the design right owner.
(3A)But design right in a design is not infringed where a person does, or authorises another to do, anything relating to an article that is made to the design if the article has been put on the market in the United Kingdom or the European Economic Area with the licence of the design right owner.
(4)For the purposes of this section reproduction may be direct or indirect, and it is immaterial whether any intervening acts themselves infringe the design right.
(5)This section has effect subject to the provisions of Chapter III (exceptions to rights of design right owner).
Cases considering section 226 31
[2003] EWCA Civ 1514 · 4 November 2003
The court applied the infringement provisions to copying that produces articles exactly or substantially to a protected design. Copying a protected part can infringe even where the resulting article has a different overall design. (see paras [8]; [28]-[29]; [39])
[2002] EWCA Civ 1119 · 31 July 2002Interprets
The court interpreted the infringement test as requiring comparison with the whole protected design and an objective assessment whether the alleged infringing article was made exactly or substantially to that design. Copying a substantial part alone may not establish infringement. (see under “Submissions” and “Conclusions”)
[2002] EWCA Civ 316 · 14 March 2002Interprets
Defines the design-right owner’s exclusive right to reproduce the design for commercial purposes by making articles to it or recording it in a design document. The provision framed the infringement issue (see para [10]).
Interprets substantial reproduction as copying the design so as to produce articles exactly or substantially to that design. The court held that the correct comparison was with the original designs and their protected shape or configuration (see paras [10], [61]-[70]).
Cited in defining primary infringement by unauthorised conduct within the design-right owner’s exclusive rights. The appeal was resolved on originality and copying, so the subsection was not separately interpreted (see para [10]).
11 more judgments, and what each says about section 226, are in the
case-law panel in the full Act.