I'm not surprised of claims of copyright on things normally considered design rights. There is overlapping in those rights and they provide different kinds of protection. It's actually standard recommendation from experts on immaterial protection to seek all kinds of protection.
A common strategy is to try to get some patents on functionality, some design rights on patterns, register trademarks based on significant design elements and to claim copyright on everything that you can possibly get away with.
The best example of something that can easily be protected in all these ways are complex molecules, like for example RNA and DNA. A designed RNA molecule would be patentable for its unique function, could get design rights because it is a pattern, its shape is distinct enough to be used as a logo and thus can be trademarked. And, since RNA is fundamentally similar to program code its covered by copyright as long as its unique.
A very valid question is, do we really need 4 different kinds of protection for the same thing? Isn't trademarks really the only kind of protection thats needed? Trademarks can protect anything with a unique identity and does so mostly because of fundamental psychological traits in humans. At the same time trademarks offer mutual protection for consumers because it provides a level of protection from fraud.
I'm not surprised of claims of copyright on things normally considered design rights. There is overlapping in those rights and they provide different kinds of protection. It's actually standard recommendation from experts on immaterial protection to seek all kinds of protection.
A common strategy is to try to get some patents on functionality, some design rights on patterns, register trademarks based on significant design elements and to claim copyright on everything that you can possibly get away with.
The best example of something that can easily be protected in all these ways are complex molecules, like for example RNA and DNA. A designed RNA molecule would be patentable for its unique function, could get design rights because it is a pattern, its shape is distinct enough to be used as a logo and thus can be trademarked. And, since RNA is fundamentally similar to program code its covered by copyright as long as its unique.
A very valid question is, do we really need 4 different kinds of protection for the same thing? Isn't trademarks really the only kind of protection thats needed? Trademarks can protect anything with a unique identity and does so mostly because of fundamental psychological traits in humans. At the same time trademarks offer mutual protection for consumers because it provides a level of protection from fraud.