How to judge the infringement of design patent?

1. When judging the design infringement, we should observe and compare it directly through the eyes of ordinary consumers, not through magnifying glasses, microscopes and other tools. However, if the product design shown in the picture or photo is enlarged when applying for a patent, the accused infringing product should also be enlarged and compared in the infringement comparison. We should first examine whether the alleged infringing products and design products belong to the same or similar products. 2. Determine whether the product types are the same or similar according to the purpose (use purpose, use state) of the design product. When determining the use of a product, it can be comprehensively determined by referring to relevant factors in the following order: brief description of design, international design classification table, product function, product sales, actual use and other factors. If the purpose (purpose and use status) of the design product and the accused infringing design product are different, the design product and the accused infringing product do not belong to the same or similar products. 3. To judge whether the patent right of design is infringed, we should take whether it is the same as or similar to the standard as the standard, not whether it constitutes a standard that ordinary consumers confuse and mistake. We should judge whether the designs are the same or similar based on the knowledge level and cognitive ability of ordinary consumers of patented products, and should not take the observation ability of ordinary designers in the technical field of design patents as the standard. When judging whether the designs are the same or similar, the designer's subjective view should not be the standard, but the visual effect of ordinary consumers should be the standard. The average consumer is a hypothetical "person" and should be defined from two aspects: knowledge level and cognitive ability. The knowledge level of ordinary consumers means that they usually have a common sense understanding of the design of the same or similar products and their common design technology before the application for a patent for design. The cognitive ability of the average consumer means that he usually has a certain resolution on the differences in shape, pattern and color of the designed products, but he will not notice the subtle changes in shape, pattern and color of the products. When defining the knowledge level and cognitive ability of general consumers of design products, we should consider the design and development process of the design products before the application date for specific design products. 4. When judging whether the designs are the same or similar, the principle is overall observation and comprehensive judgment, that is, all the design features of the authorized design and the visible part of the accused infringing design should be observed, and all the factors that can affect the overall visual effect of the product design should be comprehensively considered before making a judgment. The following conditions usually have a great influence on the overall visual effect of the design: (1) The part that is easy to be directly observed during normal use of the product is relative to other parts; (2) The design is different from other design features of the existing design. 5. If there is no difference in the overall visual effect between the accused infringing design and the authorized design, it shall be regarded as the same; If there is no substantial difference in the overall visual effect, they should be considered similar. Specifically: (1) If there is no difference in overall visual effects such as shape, pattern and color. , they should be considered the same; (2) If their overall visual effects are not exactly the same, but there is no obvious difference, they should be considered similar; (3) If the overall visual effects of the two are different in shape, pattern and color, and there are obvious differences, they should be considered as different rather than similar. The above is the answer to the design patent question, I hope it will help you.