On the 22nd of November 2024, WIPO Members adopted a new treaty on industrial designs i.e. the Riyadh Design Law Treaty (DLT). This is the second treaty that WIPO Members have adopted this year. The first treaty, i.e the WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources, and Associated Traditional Knowledge, was adopted in May and was discussed on this blog here. The DLT is aimed at simplifying and harmonising the formalities and procedures set by national and regional offices for those seeking to protect their designs. As WIPO explains, the DLT will ‘help to make the framework for design protection procedures more predictable and make the procedures themselves less complex and more affordable’ and this will make it ‘easier for designers to file applications in several different jurisdictions.’ What follows below is only a very brief overview of certain key features of the DLT and is not meant to be taken as an exhaustive analysis of the provisions of the treaty.

Although there is another WIPO treaty that already provides for the international registration of designs, i.e. the Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs (Hague Agreement), the DLT is distinct from the Hague Agreement and the two treaties pursue different goals. Essentially, the Hague Agreement provides a means for the protection of designs in multiple countries via a single application filed with the International Bureau of WIPO. However, the DLT is aimed at harmonising the procedures of national and regional offices and those seeking protection in multiple countries pursuant to the DLT will still need to file their applications in those countries. The DLT therefore only applies to national and regional applications that are filed with the national/regional office of a party to the treaty. It also only applies to industrial designs that can be registered as industrial designs or for which patents can be granted.

The DLT therefore seeks to streamline the process of seeking protection for industrial designs in multiple countries. Among other things, the DLT stipulates the maximum set of requirements for applications that can be imposed by parties to the treaty. As WIPO points out, this will ‘help to create a predictable framework for design protection procedures: designers wishing to file an application will know exactly what indications or elements may be required.’ Also, subject to satisfying any conditions that may be imposed by a party to the treaty, an application may include more than one industrial design. The DLT equally provides a grace period of 12 months after the first disclosure of a design and any disclosure during this grace period will not affect the novelty and/or originality of the industrial design. In addition, the treaty simplifies the procedure for renewing the registration of a design. The treaty also contains a provision on technical assistance and capacity building.

A notable feature of the DLT is the way in which it addresses the relationship between designs and traditional knowledge/traditional cultural expressions. Specifically, the DLT permits parties to the treaty to require that an ‘application contain an indication of any prior application or registration, or of other information, including information on traditional cultural expressions and traditional knowledge, of which the applicant is aware, that is relevant to the eligibility for registration of the industrial design.’ It will be interesting to see how this provision will be implemented in practice at the national/regional level.

Finally, it is worth mentioning that the DLT is a treaty that deals with procedural issues and not substantive law matters. The DLT therefore does not seek to harmonise the substantive aspects of industrial designs law. For instance, the treaty contains no definition of the term ‘industrial design’. This does not however mean that it has no implications for matters relating to the substantive aspects of industrial designs law.