Recently, the Suzhou courts released the “Typical Cases on Judicial Protection of Intellectual Property for the Year 2025.” The case concerning the unfair competition dispute over the shape and trade dress of the “Tripp Trapp” growing chair, handled by Lusheng Law Firm on behalf of Stokke, was honorably selected.
Brief Introduction of the Case
Stokke’s Tripp Trapp growing chair, due to its unique design, was selected by Fortune magazine as one of the “100 Great Modern Designs of the World.” Its structure was the subject of a U.S. patent application in 1975, and the protection period has now expired. However, Stokke discovered that a certain children’s home products company was selling growing chairs in its online store whose shape and configuration were highly similar to those of the Tripp Trapp growing chair, amounting to a one-to-one copying of all details. Stokke therefore engaged Lusheng Law Firm to represent it in this case and filed a lawsuit. The Lusheng team conducted in-depth arguments around core issues such as the boundaries of the application of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law after patent expiry, and the demarcation between functionality and distinctiveness of shape trade dress. Ultimately, the court fully adopted the submissions of the Lusheng team, holding that the shape and configuration trade dress formed by the overall appearance of the growing chair at issue, characterized by unique lines and a minimalist design, should be protected by the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. The court found that the defendant’s sale of the growing chairs constituted unfair competition, and ordered it to cease the infringement, compensate for losses in the amount of RMB 1.5 million, and eliminate the adverse impact. The defendant appealed against the first-instance judgment; the appeal was dismissed at second instance and the original judgment was upheld.
Typical Significance
I. Bridging the institutional gap between patent law and the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, and establishing rules for the protection of shape trade dress
This case is a typical one concerning the application of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law to protect product shapes that combine functionality and aesthetic appeal. Starting from the institutional logic of unfair competition, and through a thorough exposition of the connotation and extension of “trade dress,” the judgment clarifies that the trade dress of goods protected by the Anti-Unfair Competition Law includes “shape-structure trade dress.” From the perspective of the relationship between competition law and intellectual property law, it further clarifies that the fact that a shape configuration has been the subject of a patent application is not a necessary condition to deny that the appearance of a product may be protected under the Anti-Unfair Competition Law. This judgment clarifies the relationship between the application of the Patent Law and the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, and provides a clear adjudicative path for the protection of product shapes that combine functionality with aesthetic features.
II. Separating the functional and aesthetic levels of design, and precisely defining the boundaries of protection
The Lusheng team adduced evidence to prove that although the claims of the Tripp Trapp growing chair patent included components such as uprights, seat boards, footrests, and fastening devices, they did not define the specific shape, dimensions, curves, or angles formed when these components are combined. Those specific shapes, dimensions, curves, or angles are precisely the key elements of the product trade dress that the plaintiff seeks to protect in this case, and they differ to some extent from the technical solution asserted at the time of the patent application. This case distinguishes between the utilitarian functional design and the design elements with aesthetic significance and distinctiveness in the shape of the growing chair, thereby clarifying the scope of protection for product shapes that combine functionality and aesthetic appeal. It both protects the right of industry competitors to freely use designs in the public domain and safeguards the right holder’s unique contribution to the configuration of its product and the goodwill embodied in the product shape.
