Dyson wins court battle (From The Wiltshire Gazette and Herald)

Dyson wins court battle

8:00am Saturday 11th March 2006 in Wiltshire By Gordon Simpson

Dyson are to receive damages after the Court of Appeal ruled that another company had infringed their design rights.

Qualtex, who sell replacement parts for vacuum cleaners and other household items, have been forced to pay out after copying the designs of Dyson parts.

The court ruled in Dyson's favour and the two parties are now in negotiation over a final settlement for costs and damages.

In the interim, Qualtex has paid £130,000 in damages.

Qualtex had legally copied certain Dyson features, allowing their spare parts to be attached to the Malmesbury based company's products.

However, the manufacturer that produces certain parts to sell to Qualtex had copied the visual design of some of Dyson's spare parts, which is prohibited under British law.

Dyson added that in-house tests carried out showed differences in materials used by Qualtex had adversely affected the performance and durability of the parts.

James Dyson, the vacuum cleaner tycoon, said he was happy the court's decision had protected his company's rights.

"We are very pleased to have won this case," he said.

"It shows how important design right is, especially for small design companies and individual designers who don't necessarily have the means to protect themselves legally against people who copy their designs.

"If a musician or a writer can claim copyright, why shouldn't a designer be allowed to have design rights on his or her hard work?"

Dyson has also announced winnings from the case will be donated to the Royal College of Art for student welfare and to help young designers protect their own ideas.

Sir Christopher Frayling from the Royal College of Art said he was thrilled with the gesture.

"Many individual designers and small agencies cannot afford to defend their design rights and tend to be exploited as a consequence," he said.

"Dyson, which evidently hasn't forgotten its early struggles, has made a point of stressing the principle of design rights, which is all too often ignored at the expense of young designers.

"There's been much talk about intellectual property' and design rights are an under-publicised and very important example."