Design "and" Practical Art "protection Of Intellectual Property Discussed

This article would aim to identify the exact definition and the relation between "works of applied art" and "industrial design" and explore the best mode of protection.China does not have a law specialized in protecting industrial designs. Protection of designs is classified under the Patent Law, while statutes on industrial design is clouded by a term "works of applied art", which is explicitly mentioned as protectable under article 2 of the Berne Convention. While neither the Patent Law nor the Copyright Law in China mentions the term. The Copyright Law offers protection for "arts", while the definition is different with "applied arts" although they have some overlaps. The inexplicit scope of protection leads to confusion regarding to the operation of protection system.Much of the research will be library and internet based. Herein quotes international conventions, important cases, and best country practices, while the article is emphasizing on the in-depth of legal concepts and a few cases rather than the collection of data on a great deal of cases. Via the analysis of insufficiency of Chinese current legal system and several legislation propositions on "industrial design" and "applied art", the conclusion is brought that among modes of "copyright law or patent law protection", "dual protection" and "specific law protection", the last is strongly request and supported because it is the best legislation mode which avoids rights conflict and vacuum of protection.