As of January 1999, Japanese Laws pertaining to
protection of designs were amended. The following is a           Ryuka Publications
summary of the amendment.

Expansion of Registerable Subject Matters

Previously, only an article as a whole was valid for design registration not individual features of the article. In order to register a specific feature of an article the entire article had to be registered.
Following the amendments to the Japanese Design Law, a design-in-part registration is possible, targeted at specific features of an article rather than registration of the whole article.
The main advantage of owning the registration rights to a design-in-part is that the rights apply to any article containing a portion identical or similar to the design-in-part, regardless of the appearance of the other parts of the article. This increases the bmain_txtth and strength of the protection, as it significantly broadens the range of articles on which rights may be enforceable.
A design-in-part application should be filed prior to filing any design-in-whole applications. The existence of a prior design-in-whole application, which contains a similar or identical part to the design-in part application, may make the later design-in-part application invalid. This is regardless of whether or not both applications are made by the same applicant.

Expansion of Registerable System Designs

System designs refer to sets of two or more articles that are designed to be used together, and have similar design elements. Similar design elements mean that every article must have an identically shaped part or pattern. Previously, 13 sets of articles acceptable for registration were specified. This has been expanded to 56 sets of articles, and includes for example underwear sets, kitchen sets, stationery sets, golf club sets, drum sets and x-ray sets.

Related Design System Replacing the Similar Design System

Previously, modifications of designs were protected under the "similar design system", where a design similar to a registered design was offered protection under the umbrella of the registered design. The similar design did not in itself have a scope of protection going beyond the protection offered by the registered design.
The related design system allows a group of similar designs to be registered. One of the designs must be specified by the principle design, while the others become related designs. The related designs must be similar to the principle design. A related design that is similar to another related design, but dissimilar to the principal design is unregisterable. Registered related designs have their own scope of protection, in the same way as a regular design, and have a right independent of the principle design. This independent right means that the related design right will not lapse, even if the principal design is subsequently nullified or abandoned. Applications for the principal and related designs must be filed on the same day.
Careful consideration must be made of a group of designs to determine which is to become the principle design. A poor selection may lead to failure of registration of the related designs.

For Obtaining Broader Design Protection in Japan

The design protection extends to similar designs of a registered design. Since the scope of similarity is vague, it is advisable that a related design system and a partial design system are effective to obtain the broader and stronger design protection.

1. Related Design System
Similar ornamental designs may be filed as related designs only if these are filed on the same date by the same applicant. Variations of first-applied design cannot be filed later. Accordingly, it is advisable that variations, if any, be filed on the same date.

2. Portion Design
A portion of product may be registered as a portion design. The portion design right covers articles which have same or similar portion of registered portion design, even when the products are not similar as a whole. When an article has a designed portion which is worth protecting, the partial design should be also filed.

The filing fee of a related design application or partial design application is same as that of a normal design application. Should you wish to protect the related or portion design, please let us know.

Moderation of Filing Requirements

Wider ranges of techniques are now acceptable for illustrating designs for which applications have been filed. This can lead to the need for fewer illustrations. However, care must be taken to include all necessary views, otherwise the application may be deemed indefinite, or the granted right may be unenforceable.
A written submission may be included with the design application describing distinguishing features of the design. It is not essential, and is not itself examined but it expedites the examination. It may have some impact on the interpretation of the scope of the design right with respect to infringement litigation.

Higher Creativity Requirements for Design Registration

Previously, a high degree of creativity in a design was unnecessary, resulting in the registration of many very similar designs having a narrow scope of protection. In order for an applicant to gain comprehensive protection for a design right, defensive applications were necessary for designs similar to the target design. The review of the Design Law eliminates the need for defensive applications, and encourages a greater degree of creativity in a design application.
The new revision requires that designs must be dissimilar to motifs or known designs both in Japan and worldwide. If a similarity exists to a known motif, the design is deemed to lack creativity and will not be registered. Previously, the law only required that designs be dissimilar to well-known motifs in Japan. This therefore excludes a design that is a simple replacement of a part of a known design with another known design, or the rearrangement of a known design.

Exclusion of Purely Functional Designs

Under the revised design law, a design is excluded from registration if it consists solely of a shape indispensable to the function of the article. This may include a shape that is inherent to the function of a design or a design whose shape is inherent in meeting required standards such as ISO.
A particular example of a purely functional design would be a design-in-part application filed for a connecting portion of an attachment.

Further Exclusions

If a later filed design is similar in part to an earlier filed design, the later application will be rejected upon publication of the earlier filed design. This occurs regardless of whether or not both applications have the same applicant or designer. The reason for this rejection is that the later filed application is deemed as having no creativity worth protection since the later filed design is almain_txty contained in the earlier filed application.

Loss of Prior Application Status by Abandonment or Rejection

Previously, if a design application was abandoned or rejected, the characteristics of the design remained undisclosed to the public. This often resulted in unknowing duplication or similarity to the rejected design in new applications. The rejected application did, however, retain the status of a prior application and therefore had the strength to provide the basis of rejection of later similar applications. The revision to the Design Law now removes the status of a prior application for any applications that have been rejected or abandoned, thus removing their power to form the basis of rejection of similar designs in the future.