By Andrew Clay
New Kid on the Block
There are some new kids on the block in the design world and they are making huge waves.
Best of all they are British.
Although you won’t have heard of these titans of design, the chances are very high that you regularly use some of their products.
Their products are classics of contemporary design. Like many classic designs, there products seem strangely familiar: was there ever a time in your own life when such classic designs didn’t exist?
It all started back on 26 November 2022 for that was the date on which Maaz Saleem Khanani set up Vision Bros Ltd, trading out of modest premises at Flat 304, Unit 950 Crossness Road in Barking.
A Huge Splash
Despite such humble beginnings, it wasn’t long before Maaz had come up with this timeless design of electrical tape:-
Knowing a thing or two about intellectual property rights, Maaz quickly registered this stunningly new design as a registered design at the UKIPO on 30 May 2023: here . Like many of Mazz’s designs, this one has been a huge success in the UK market with millions sold.
On the same day, Mazz’s sudden creative burst was evidenced by other products he protected as UK registered designs:-
Maaz was clearly on a roll – if you will forgive the pun. There was no stopping him. Other design classics that came out of the Vision Bros stable included this clothes peg (see here):-
This bag clip (see here):-
This mesh tea ball (see here):-
Or what about this novel device for those learning how to drive here
We could go on but you get the point.
What is particularly impressive about Maaz’s contribution to British design is both its scale and the breadth of its output. In just over three months, trading out of a little flat in Barking with no other employees, Maaz created a dazzling array of different products including everything from hair dryers, blankets, taco holders, shower heads, a USB fan, easel stands, draft excluders, buckets and numerous other items. Some 291 separate products in all: here Did the man not sleep at all? What is his secret?
At least we can hope that all this creative effort has paid off for Maaz: a 4 April 2025 assignment to Lexer Trading Ltd of all these registered designs has recently been registered with the UKIPO. Lexer Trading Ltd is a 10 July 2024 start up with offices at Apartment 19 Poplar House,116 Phoebe Street, Salford.
Presumably this was some kind of multi-pound transaction with magic circle firms on both sides and Maaz, exhausted by his herculean feat of prolific design, is now recovering in the sun by some mediterranean pool?
How to Properly Recognise the True Creative Output of Maaz?
Joking aside. In the UKIPO and the EUIPO, there is no novelty searching for registered designs. Nor is there any requirement for the applicant to make any declaration to the effect that the design for which registration is sought is not one that is already known to the applicant to be on the market, courtesy of the activities of third parties unconnected in any way with the applicant. This state of affairs means that registering an old third party design does not amount to a criminal offence in the UK under section 34 of the Registered Designs Act 1949: no false entry in the register of designs is made as there is no entry on the register, verifying that the design is not an old third party design.
Surely a sensible first step would be for the UKIPO to introduce such a declaration into the registered design application process and ensure that such declaration finds its way onto the register, with the consequence that falsely giving the declaration would, at least in very clear cases of wrongdoing, amount to a criminal offence under section 34. The introduction of such a declaration (together with an appropriate timely warning about the existence of the section 34 offence of making a false declaration) would not stop all wrongdoing, but it would surely deter at least some of the wrongdoers. We have scoured all applicable treaties (Paris Convention, TRIPS, etc) and we can find nothing in any of them that would preclude such a move as it would only cause an issue for third parties filling obviously invalid designs.
Does All This Matter?
It is tempting to think that as registered designs for items such as the clothes peg shown above are obviously invalid then none of this really matters.
Tempting but wrong.
The reason is that the large online trading platforms (such as Amazon) make heavy use of algorithms when assessing infringement claims. In response to almost any claim of registered design infringement, however spurious, the product the subject of the complaint is automatically and immediately delisted, as this represents the lowest risk strategy for the online trading platform. Faced with such a take down, the affected trader has two basic options: firstly they can contact the complainant and negotiate with them to retract the complaint, which can often result in a lengthy flurry of emails and not infrequently involves the lawyers. Alternatively, the affected party can submit evidence to the platform direct, via the platform’s own internal appeals procedure, as to why there is no infringement. Such evidence can be in the form of letters of authorisation from rights holders, invoices, court orders or an opinion from IP solicitors or counsel.
But here is the rub. Whichever route you go down, your listing will often be down for quite some time. That matters as the algorithms which such platforms use to display goods in response to key word searches, give significant weighting to recent sales and recent customer feedback. No recent sales and no recent positive customer feedback can lead to a listing disappearing off the first page of search results, which will result in vastly reduced sales. Climbing back up the mountain can take some considerable time. Sales lost during the climb are lost forever.
So yes, as the examples in this post make clear, all does this does matter. It is currently far too easy to obtain invalid registered designs. This state of affairs risks bringing the IP system, as a whole, into disrepute. AI may well, in time, make novelty searching for registered designs for IP offices both cheap and effective but that is still some way off from being adopted. This issue can and should be addressed now by the UKIPO’s introduction of relevant declarations during the application process for such rights. The EUIPO should also take similar action in relation to EU registered designs.
What Sonder & Clay can do for you?
If you have been negatively affected by obviously invalid registered designs, Sonder & Clay’s specialist IP team can efficiently and cost effectively help you address this problem. Please get in touch to book a consultation.
