Industrial Property Law

Article L. 521-10 of the Intellectual Property Code stipulates that any infringement knowingly committed against the property rights of the owner of the design or model, as guaranteed by Book V of the Intellectual Property Code, is punishable by three years' imprisonment and a fine of up to EUR 300,000. The material element of the infringement lies in the same acts as those which engage the civil  …

Infringement

Article L. 521-10 of the Intellectual Property Code stipulates that any infringement knowingly committed against the property rights of the owner of the design or model, as guaranteed by Book V of the Intellectual Property Code, is punishable by three years' imprisonment and a fine of up to EUR 300,000. The material element of the infringement lies in the same acts as those which engage the civil liability of the infringer, defined in Articles L. 513-4 and L. 513-5 of the Intellectual Property Code .

Unlike civil proceedings, criminal proceedings for counterfeiting require proof of intent. In effect, Article 121-3, paragraph 1, of the Criminal Code establishes the principle that there is no crime or offense without intent to commit it. Article L. 521-10 of the Intellectual Property Code therefore makes it an offense to knowingly infringe the property rights of the owner of the design or model. Criminal courts sometimes presume intent when the accused is a business .

Infringement is a legal offense that can be proven by any means. The infringer can avoid liability by demonstrating his or her absence of any wrongdoing, including imprudence or negligence. On the other hand, the proprietor's passivity or tolerance has no bearing on the finding of infringement.

CA Paris, 19 September 2012, LawLex202200001178JBJ, which held that in assessing acts of infringement, it was irrelevant whether the design remained at the draft stage, since it was a representation brought to the attention of the public to present a new range of products; CA Paris, 19 September 2012, LawLex202200001178JBJ, which held that sending e-mails to customers of referenced designs incorporating all the essential features of registered designs characterized acts of infringement.

Cass. crim, 4 April 2018, LawLex202200001954JBJ, which states that a jewelry business professional, who could not have been unaware of the existence of the three designs in question, knowingly infringed the rights to the registered designs; CA Lyon, 29 January 2009, LawLex202200001056JBJ, which ruled that the element of intent had been established, since it is a matter of principle in matters of design infringement that bad faith is presumed, and that it is the responsibility of professionals to check, before manufacturing or marketing designs, whether there are any rights in these designs.

Industrial Property Law

519. Infringement

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

519. Infringement

Demandez un accès gratuit au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise