According to today’s Daily Telegraph Peter Wylly, an award-winning designer, is suing The Body Shop for infringement of one of his product designs. The Body Shop, he alleged, copied his distinctive “Kool Karma” incense burner without his permission. The incense burner, designed in 1998, had the appearance of a 1950s abstract sculpture; its circular shape enables oil to be heated over a tea-light candle. Wylly sold 100,000 of the burners to The Body Shop in 1999 before the retailer stopped placing orders, telling him that the product was not selling. But this summer he noticed that The Body Shop was selling a scaled-down version of his design, made in Taiwan. The Body Shop told him that the smaller product, the Circle of Life Aroma Jar, had been one of their top sellers over the past two years. It was still on sale last month, priced £10. Accepting liability for infringement, The Body Shop offered to pay Wylly 35p for every jar sold outside the United States and Mexico. Wylly, represented by Beachcroft Wansbroughs solicitor Robin Fry, is asking the Patents Court to order the company to give an account of the profits it has made from selling the item.
The IPKat notes that design right infringement has suddenly become the flavour of the month in the UK (see also “First Community Design Action Ends in Win for Mattel”, posted on IPKat yesterday).
More on Karma here, here and here
Click here for No Karma, Bad Karma, Sweet Karma and Club Karma
Circle of Life concepts here, here and here
The IPKat notes that design right infringement has suddenly become the flavour of the month in the UK (see also “First Community Design Action Ends in Win for Mattel”, posted on IPKat yesterday).
More on Karma here, here and here
Click here for No Karma, Bad Karma, Sweet Karma and Club Karma
Circle of Life concepts here, here and here
KOOL KARMA DESIGNER SEEKS OUT-OF-BODY SHOP RELIEF
![KOOL KARMA DESIGNER SEEKS OUT-OF-BODY SHOP RELIEF]()
Reviewed by Jeremy
on
Monday, November 03, 2003
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html