Części zamienne w świetle prawa wzorów, prawa konkurencji oraz regulacji prokonsumenckich dotyczących prawa do naprawy

Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace z Prawa Własności Intelektualnej 2025, nr 2, s. 95-131.

Współczesne wysiłki nakierowane na transformacje ekologiczne, wdrożenie aspektów gospodarki wolnego obiegu, zmiany paradygmatu konsumpcyjnego zwracają uwagę na możliwość naprawy produktów jako jeden z czynników przedłużenia żywotności produktów oraz zapobiegania wytwarzaniu nadmiernych ilości odpadów i ich złego zagospodarowania. Możliwość naprawy zakłada dostęp do części zamiennych oraz do podmiotów świadczących usługi naprawcze. Użytkownicy końcowi powinni mieć sposobność wyboru części i usług naprawczych, a w warunkach zdrowej i efektywnej konkurencji na rynku cena za nie również powinna być przystępna. Praktyka zweryfikowała dotychczas te założenia optymistyczno-teoretyczne w tych branżach gospodarczych, w których produkty wielokomponentowe wymagają współdziałania z produktami pomocniczymi (tj. akcesoriami) i są zaprojektowane z myślą o serwisowaniu, naprawie oraz częstej wymianie komponentów w warunkach zwykłego użytkowania. Podręcznikowe przykłady stanowiły samochody i drukarki, choć imperatyw naprawy i dostępności części zamiennych, w tym akcesoriów, rozszerza się obecnie na sprzęt gospodarstwa domowego, urządzenia elektroniczne, sprzęt budowlany itd. Od strony prawnej w regulacjach z różnych gałęzi prawa, takich jak: prawo własności intelektualnej, prawo konkurencji (antymonopolowe), prawo konsumenckie, zauważalne są wysiłki, aby fragmentarycznie rozwiązać pewne zagadnienia w celu usprawnienia rozwoju rynku części zamiennych i usług naprawczych.

The article discusses the issue of spare parts from the perspective of design law, competition law, and pro-consumer regulations promoting the repair of goods and ecodesign requirements. The first section addresses the time when design law was not harmonized, while competition rules alone could not solve the problem of limited access to spare parts and their high prices. The second part looks at the scope of the new and compulsory design repair clause, its impact on the liberalization of the aftermarket of spare parts and maintenance services, and the interplay with the aforementioned consumer regulations. The following section places spare parts within the framework of competition law by emphasising the main difficulty of defining the relevant market so as to establish a competition law infringement. The final part focuses on specific regulations of competition law, which have been present in the automotive sector for many years, with the aim of improving distribution and independent access to spare parts, tools and technical information necessary for repair services. Pro-consumer regulations bring an additional layer of obligations relating to the manufacturing, distribution of spare parts, and the collection and sharing of information for repair purposes. This study argues that the absence of clarity as to the interaction between the legal regulations discussed here may compromise the achievement of the goal of improving competition on the aftermarket of repair services.

A multi-perspective view on visibility in EU design law

Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2024, t. 19, nr 8, s. 648-657.

In EU design law, the parameter of visibility must multitask. This article aims to discuss its meaning and legal consequences against the current and amended legal provisions for designs. As the legal notion of a design is the ‘appearance of a product’, visibility has been woven into design features’ requirement of perceptibility to the eye. Visibility also aids in the identification of the object of protection for a registered design through the registration documentation and, analogically, the identification of an unregistered design through proofs of disclosure. By this token, design features visibly displayed by the representation/disclosure of a design determine the comparison between the overall impression of a design and another design/product for the purposes of invalidity or enforcement. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has also recently framed visibility in the perspective of evidentiary issues of technical functionality. Visibility represents a prerequisite for the assessment of novelty and/or individual character of a design of a component part of a complex product. This article looks into the CJEU’s guidance concerning the protection of parts of products, including the interpretation of the criterion of visibility during normal use that applies to component parts.

Modular systems, interconnecting features and technical function in EU design law : GC rules on relationship between functionality provisions in Article 8 CDR

Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2023, t. 18, nr 6, s. 409-413.

The General Court ruled that not all the features ensuring the interconnection between two products and covered by the must-fit prohibition are also solely dictated by the technical function of one of the products; a design right conferred over a modular product may, however, be invoked for the benefit of all of its must-fit features, irrespective of whether or not they are solely dictated by the technical function.

Protecting and Understanding Digital Designs : The Shape of Things to Come

Studia Iuridica 2023, nr 101, s. 42-59.

This study looks into aspects of the new EU design legislation that relate to the subject-matter of digital designs and the extent to which Polish law should adapt for full harmonization. The first part examines the new open-ended definitions of a ‘design’ and ‘product’ with a focus on dematerialized items that exist solely through appearance. The second part touches upon several legal parameters serving the identification of the object of design protection. It discusses the visibility requirement embedded by the filing requirements, the eye-perception of design features, and the disconnection of the scope of protection from the designated product category. The last part takes an interdisciplinary approach based on the rules of psychology and design engineering in order to explain the issues that underline human vision, with a focus on the appearance of user interfaces. The understanding of sensory and cognitive determinants of human perception is a useful guide for a judge or examiner in the assessment of the overall impression of two designs. Because of the challenges resulting from the specificity of digital designs, this article argues that Polish law should comprehensively implement the new EU design provisions in order to prevent further difficulties in enforcement.

The Procrustean fitting of trade marks under the requirements of clear and precise subject‐matter in the EU trade mark law : A case of position marks

Journal of World Intellectual Property 2021, t. 25, nr 1, s. 45-70.

In the European Union Trademark law (EUTM), clear and precise subject-matter of a trade mark is a prerequisite of proper filing and determines the conditions and scope of protection. Registration rules have evolved together with the meaning of this standard. The paper examines the legal status of position marks, which lacked their own registration specifics within initial EUTM, and thus were usually filed through other categories (figurative, colour, three-dimensional), and contrasts this practice with the registration scheme of the new law. The analysis looks into the effects of Court of Justice's guidance when retroactively applied to trade marks registered upon earlier law. The exemplary case of a blade of grass inside a bottle is used to map the meaning of ‘unaligned’ description and/or indication vis-à-vis the prime relevance of (graphic) representation. The final part explores how identifying the subject-matter of a position mark has an impact on assessing its distinctiveness, engaging within functionality objections and proving genuine use. The paper advocates for refraining from applying a fixed understanding of the requirement of clear and precise subject-matter, especially with regard to old registrations, and, a fortiori, to flexible subject-matter, such as position signs.

‘A bottle with a diagonal line on it’ or ‘a bottle with a blade of grass inside it’? : GC rules on the subject matter of a trade mark and its permissible alteration for genuine use purposes

Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2020, t. 15, nr 12, s. 942-944.

Why is the Functionality Doctrine in Trade Mark Law worth Advanced (Re)Consideration?

Contemporary Central & East European Law 2019, nr 1, s. 43-54.

This article considers the necessity of preparing a comprehensive study, over absolute refusal grounds pertaining to functional signs set in the EU trademark law, which would meet the business community’s need to register non-traditional trade marks. The study aims to define the exact scope of the aforementioned exclusions through objective criteria that can render them a workable tool, distinct from refusal grounds pertaining to distinctiveness, and able to solve problems of overlapping rights. As its specific research methodology, the study adopts comparative results coming from the US trade dress functionality doctrine, and a specific input offered from a ‘law and economics’ perspective, including competition rules related to market definition and substitutability of products.

Trade marks' functionality in EU Law : expected new trends after the Louboutin case

European Intellectual Property Review 2019, t. 41, nr 2, s. 98-106.

This article explores the possible impact of new functional provisions set in EU trade mark law on the validity of existing rights conferred under the previous body of law. The starting point is given by the CJEU ruling and opinions of Advocate General delivered in the Louboutin case. The analysis touches important issues of interpretation, such as retroactive application of new law, type of signs caught by functional exclusions, and suggestions to take into consideration a time factor which may change the status of product features at issue, depending on evolving consumers’ expectations.

Graficzny interfejs użytkownika (GUI) jako wzór przemysłowy

Przegląd Prawa Handlowego 2018, nr 8, s. 29-33.

W prawie polskim i europejskim ochrona graficznego interfejsu użytkownika (GUI) jako wzór przemysłowy jest ułatwiona przez przyjęcie otwartej definicji normatywnej cech wzoru i produktu. Dzięki temu przedmiot takiego wzoru może składać się wyłącznie z wyglądu symbolu graficznego lub kombinacji kilku elementów. W praktyce mogą pojawić się pewne trudności wynikające z niejasnego lub nieprecyzyjnego określenia przedmiotu oraz potrzeby przedstawienia dokładnej reprezentacji graficznej wzoru, zwłaszcza, gdy weźmie się pod uwagę nieobowiązkowy charakter opisu. W przypadku zgłoszenia odmian wzoru do polskiej rejestracji, jak również zgłoszenia wzoru wspólnotowego zawierającego animację, istnieje wymóg, aby załączone różne widoki wykazywały cechy wspólne. Każda niespójność lub wątpliwość dotycząca przedmiotu wzoru GUI spowoduje problemy z ustaleniem jego zakresu ochrony, tj. ogólnego wrażenia wzoru, na dalszym etapie dochodzenia roszczeń z tytułu naruszenia takiego prawa lub w przypadku postępowania o jego unieważnienie.

Protecting GUI as an industrial design in Polish and European law is facilitated by the adoption of an open legal definition of design features and product. This enables the subject matter of such a design to consist of the very appearance of a graphical symbol or a combination of several elements. In practice certain difficulties may arise from the possibly unclear or nonspecific subject matter and the need to submit an accurate graphical representation, especially taking into account the non-compulsory character of a description. In case of a multiple application for a Polish registration or for a Community design containing an animation, there is a requirement for the attached images to have common features. Any inconsistency or doubt concerning the subject matter of a GUI design is bound to create problems in establishing its scope of protection i.e. the design’s overall impression, at a further stage of enforcing such a right in infringement or invalidity proceedings.

The functionality of three-dimensional trade marks in the Polish practice

Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego. Prace z Prawa Własności Intelektualnej 2016, nr 2, s. 20-31.

Designs Determined by the Product's Technical Function : Arguments for an Autonomous Test

European Intellectual Property Review 2016, t. 38, nr 1, s. 23-30.

Nieważność wzoru wspólnotowego z powodu kolizji z wcześniejszym oznaczeniem odróżniającym w świetle praktyki OHIM

Europejski Przegląd Sądowy 2014, nr 12, s. 12-19.

Kształt produktu pomiędzy dystynktywnością a atrakcyjnością zwiększającą znacznie wartość towaru : refleksje po wyroku Sądu z 6.10.2011 r. w sprawie Bang Olufsen, T-508/08

Monitor Prawniczy 2012, nr 2, s. 1179-1188.