Protection of Graphical User Interfaces as Registered Design Rights or Design Patents in EU

• Official fee for filing a registered design application in the EU starts at €350 for one design.
• For the subsequent designs, up to 10 designs, the fee is €175 per design.
• From the 11th design onwards, the fee is €80 per design.

As of May 1, 2025, with the EU design legislative reform, an unified additional application fee for each additional design included in a multiple application will be €125.

• Must renew the registration on its fifth anniversary, for up to a maximum of 25 years.
• Fees:
  • 1st renewal: €90
  • 2nd renewal: €120
  • 3rd renewal: €150
  • 4th renewal: €180
  • Late renewal (additional fee): 25% of the additional fees

As of May 1, 2025, with the EU design legislative reform, the renewal fees will be significantly higher. This will also apply to designs which became due for renewal before May 1, 2025 but are renewed after that day. Therefore, it is advisable to renew the designs as soon as possible to avoid higher official fees.

• New fees:
  • 1st renewal: €150
  • 2nd renewal: €250
  • 3rd renewal: €400
  • 4th renewal: €700
  • Late renewal (additional fee): 25% of the additional fees

• Once the EUIPO has examined the application, and assuming there are no refusals raised or issues with the application, the design could be registered within a few days.
• Once the design is registered, the EUIPO publishes the design (unless the applicant has applied to defer the registration, see below).
• There is also the option for the applicant to defer their registration for up to 30 months (which means only the file number, date of filing, date of entry in the Register, registration number, name and address of the holder, and name and business address of the representative (if applicable) will be published). No other particulars, such as the representation of the design or the indication of products, will be published.

The grace period in the EU is 12 months, and therefore the designer must file the application within the 12-month grace period (i.e. within 12 months of the first disclosure of the relevant design).

Up to 30 months.

In principle, filing PoA is not required, but the applicant should generally be confident it is the legal owner of the design it is seeking to protect.  

If claiming priority, the applicant must include details of the prior design application from which its priority claim is made either together with the design application, or within 1 month of the filing date.

Within 3 months of either the filing date or, as the case may be, receipt of the priority claim, the applicant must submit priority documents, either:

• by providing the WIPO DAS access code; or
• by submitting a copy of all priority documents along with, where applicable, their translations.

Aside from formalities examination, the EUIPO’s examination of substantive protection requirements is limited to two grounds for non-registrability. A design application will be refused if it does not correspond to the definition of the design (e.g. it does not constitute the ‘appearance of a product’) or if it is contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality. 

No. There is no substantive examination of the design, and the EUIPO examiners will not examine the design’s novelty or individual character by reference to prior art. Post grant, third parties will be able to object to the registration by challenging the validity of the registration.

• Yes, although such examination is limited to formal requirements only. This consists of verifying whether (i) the priority claim was filed at the same time as filing the design application or within 1 month of the filing date, (ii) file number, filing date and country of previous application are indicated in the priority claim, and (iii) priority documents are submitted no later than 3 months of the priority claim (either via DAS system or by submitting their copies and translations).
• Importantly, the EUIPO does not examine substantive requirements ex-officio, but only during inter partes proceedings (if necessary). It is, therefore, crucial for the applicant to ensure the design application meets all the substantive requirements, as the EUIPO will not invite the applicant to remedy potential deficiencies. Substantive requirements include, among others, whether the previous application is the first filing or whether it concerns an identical design.
• With regards to the latter, designs are considered ‘identical’ if they differ only in details that can be qualified as ‘immaterial’. Notably, ‘identity’ is not affected if the design application is altered to comply with EU law requirements.

No, it’s not possible to oppose an EU design application at the application stage. The only opportunity to challenge a design is through an invalidity action after registration.

The design must be represented by at least one view, with a maximum of seven views allowed per design. The EUIPO also permits three additional unprotected views. While these extra views are not part of the protected design, they can be helpful for illustrating aspects of the design that may not be fully captured in the protected views. The EUIPO considers the views in the order they are numbered by the applicant. Therefore, views numbered 8 to 10 will be treated as the three unprotected views.

• Yes, a sequence of animations can be protected within a design application. Currently, the relevant animation must be represented by including in the design application a sequence of the animation, done by filing a series of static images. The EUIPO does not currently accept a video as part of the application. That said, the upcoming EU Desing Legislative Reform (see Q23) opens a possibility for designs to be represented in any form of visual reproduction, which could be static, dynamic or animated, including drawings, photographs, videos, computer imaging or computer modelling. It is expected that EUIPO will incorporate this new rule into their practice and Guidelines soon. 
• The EUIPO’s Design Guidelines mention at paragraph 5.3.6 that snapshots can be used to show different specific moments in time, in a clearly understandable progression.
• Up to seven views can be used to show the sequence of the animation, at different specific points in time of the animation, though the seven views must be visually-related (i.e. must have features in common) and must show the sequence in a clearly understandable progression.

• No written disclaimers are permitted. The representation of the views of the design must by themselves show the scope of protection the applicant is seeking. Accordingly, where the applicant wishes to disclaim any feature of a design this must be shown visually (graphically), typically through the use of dotted lines around any area or features of the design to which protection is not sought.
• The EUIPO’s Design Guidelines at paragraph 5.4 provides guidance on how visual disclaimers can be used to exclude features from protection.

• The use of line and shading within drawings, the use of colour drawings and high-definition photographs are acceptable. To get the best clarity we recommend black and white line drawings. 
• The EUIPO sets out the following guidelines on drawing conventions:
  • The same design must be represented in all of the relevant views, in that an applicant cannot combine different features or colours in the same representation.
  • The background of the view must be neutral (i.e. as empty as possible).
  • There must be no text or symbols i.e. elements that are not intrinsic to the design itself, such as explanatory text, numbers, arrows, lines or symbols.
  • Magnified views must be uploaded as separate images.
  • Any disclaimers must be consistent across all the views – exclusions can be illustrated by using broken lines, blurring or colour shading.
  • When submitting views of disassembled products or articles forming a set, the applicant must also submit a view showing all the assembled parts or articles.
  • If seeking to protect a two-dimensional ornamentation or surface pattern, the applicant must portray just the ornamentation or pattern (i.e. not the pattern/ornamentation being applied to a specific product).

• A GUI can also be protected by copyright qualifying as a graphic work provided it is original, in the sense that it is not copied from an existing work.
• It is also possible to protect a GUIs by filing for protection as a trade mark through the registration of elements in the GUIs, such as the screen display, icons, brands or logos.

The additional IP rights co-exist alongside any registered design right. By way of example, a GUI may be protected as a registered design, with the protection lasting for a maximum duration of 25 years. Concurrently, if the GUI or elements of the GUI such as logos or other artwork qualifies as a graphic work, it may have the benefit of copyright protection which lasts for the lifetime of the creator (i.e. the designer) plus 70 years after their death. At the same time, a GUI can be registered as a trade mark, lasting indefinitely if renewed.

• Focusing RCD protection on key features: as discussed above in answer to Q16, since there is no possibility to use words to describe the elements to be excluded, applicants should seek professional advice to ensure their drawings work to communicate effectively the elements of their design they are seeking to exclude. If an applicant makes the design too broad, there is a risk this renders the design more vulnerable to invalidity attacks.
• Limited scope to illustrate animations As noted above in our response to Q14, an EU registered design applicant can only provide a maximum of seven protected views per design (as compared to 12 views for UK designs, and unlimited views for US designs). It may therefore be necessary to split a single animated sequence up into multiple design applications in order to get the most effective protection for a full sequence.

• While GUIs are expressly eligible for registration (under class 14-04 of the Locarno Classification), they represent particular challenges when it comes to articulating the scope of design protection through a maximum of seven views. It is therefore critical to spend time getting the drawings correct since they define the scope of protection conferred.
• The EUIPO examiners check whether the views relate to the same design; as such, it is best to ensure views (of the GUI, when depicting animations) are consistent and clearly relate to the same animation sequence (i.e. using the same colours, fonts, shading, graphics, etc).
• Along with submitting multiple representations to accurately define your GUI, it is also important to use disclaimers to ensure the application is not invalidated by giving the impression that additional sequences/animations are intended to be protected.
• As with all EU registered design applications, we recommend professional legal advice is sought to obtain expert advice on the best way to present your GUIs. We have a dedicated Design Law Group available to advise on this complex area of law. Further information can be found here.

• When filing a Hague application for GUI design protection, you must ensure you are either a national of a contracting party, or have domicile/habitual residence, or a real and effective industrial or commercial establishment in the territory of a contracting party.
• Filing via the Hague system also allows you to seek protection for your design through a single (international) application; you can designate up to 100 designs in 97 countries.
• Although filing via the Hague system allows you to seek protection in multiple countries, and enables WIPO to undertake a central formalities check, the substantive examination process is left to the IP office of each designated country and their rules can vary considerably.
• The Hague system also allows for a maximum of 30 months for deferment of publication of the application, running from the filing date (or where priority is claimed, from the priority date of the application concerned). This is subject, however, to the accepted deferment dates for the relevant designated country; this would not be an issue for the EU, which has a maximum period of 30 months for deferment (as opposed to, for example, the UK which has a maximum period of 12 months). 

• In November 2024, the Council of the EU approved the adoption of the Design Legislative Reform package, with some amendments entering into force already on May 1, 2025 and remaining changes applying from July 1, 2026. The EU design protection landscape will be modernised to reflect new technologies. Most importantly, the ‘design’ and ‘product’ definitions will become broader and clearer, with ‘design’ explicitly including animations, motions and transitions.
• The new rules clarify that design protection is available also for non-physical products, such as ‘graphic user interfaces’, which are specifically mentioned in the new Regulation. The new legislation also opens a possibility for designs to be represented in any form of visual reproduction, which could be static, dynamic or animated, including drawings, photographs, videos, computer imaging or computer modelling.