Legal battle continues to trundle on

Trunki Design and Copyright case

In July last year, Magmatic won a case in the High Court against PMS International, the developer of the Kiddee Case - Link to case. Magmatic was formed by inventor John Law after an infamous appearance on Dragon’s Den in 2006.  This decision was overturned by the Court of Appeal last week.  Link to Appeal

The legal battle is now heading for the Supreme Court as Magmatic, the company behind Trunki, has intimated that they intend to appeal the ruling. PMS International have, in turn, intimated that they intend to pursue a claim for damages against Magmatic over a previously obtained injunction. 

The original court ruling found that the Kiddee Case had breached the design rights of the inventor behind the Trunki and banned PMS International - based in Hong Kong - from selling its product in Europe. Both cases have horn-like handles and clasps resembling the nose and tail of an animal.

However, in the Court of Appeal, Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Kitchin said that the two cases conveyed a very different impression.  

Para 53: "Further, the overall impression created by the two designs is very different. The impression created by the CRD is that of a horned animal. It is a sleek and stylised design and, from the side, has a generally symmetrical appearance with a significant cut away semicircle below the ridge. By contrast the design of the Kiddee Case is softer and more rounded and evocative of an insect with antennae or an animal with floppy ears. At both a general and a detailed level the Kiddee Case conveys a very different impression."

What this case underlines is the importance of properly protecting your Intellectual Property.  In this case, it seems that "simple line drawings" may have been afforded more protection than the high quality greyscale CAD drawings which formed Trunki's Community Registered Design.

Take some time to Google Trunki and the Kiddee Case and you can make up your own mind.  In the writer's opinion, the two designs do appear quite similar, especially when considering the unique fact that the cases can be ridden on by children.  With this case heading for the Supreme Court, it will be interesting to see what happens next.