Protecting Creativity in a Digital Age: Hong Kong Rethinks its Registered Designs Regime
On 17 December 2025, the Hong Kong Government launched a public consultation on the comprehensive review of the registered designs regime under the Registered Designs Ordinance (Cap. 522) (the "Ordinance"). Since the enactment of the Ordinance in 1997, new design trends have emerged, driven by rapid technological innovation, the rise of the digital economy, and increasingly sophisticated consumer expectations. Design-intensive industries now play a critical role in the Hong Kong economy, contributing to product differentiation, brand value, and international competitiveness across various sectors. Against this backdrop, the Government considered it both timely and necessary to ensure that the registered designs regime remains fit for purpose, responsive to industry needs, aligned with international standards, and capable of supporting ambitions in innovation.
Key Issues Under Consultation
Definitions of "Design" and "Article"
The consultation document addresses a number of substantive and procedural issues. At the heart of the review are the fundamental statutory definitions of "design" and "article." The current definition confines a "design" to features of shape, configuration, pattern, or ornament applied to an article by an industrial process. The Government is now considering whether these four exhaustive features remain sufficient to capture the modern understanding of "design," and whether a shift should be made to a broader concept focused on the "appearance of an article," which is more intuitive and better reflects how designers create and consumers perceive products in the marketplace. The Government is also considering removing the industrial process requirement to align with international standards, and expand the statutory list of exhaustive protectable design features to include other elements such as "colours" or "combination of colours" to reflect the diverse ways in which designers create visual appeal. The definition of "article" may also be widened to include handicraft or handmade products, recognising the growing importance of artisanal and small-scale production.
Scope of Design Protection
The consultation also examines what types of designs should qualify for protection. While virtual designs (such as icons and graphical user interfaces, for example, interface of web apps and software) applied to physical articles (e.g., screen displays) can already be registered in Hong Kong, the Government is considering whether to extend protection to designs which are not embodied in physical products, with carefully defined scope to minimalize the overlap of design rights with copyright.
With regards to spare parts, currently a part of an article can only be registered as a design if it is "made and sold separately," and a "must match" exclusion prevents registration of features that depend on the appearance of a larger product (such as car body panels). The Government is now exploring the possibility of having a "must fit" exclusion, which would prevent design rights from blocking the manufacture of parts that must be shaped in a particular way to mechanically connect with another product (such as prongs of a power plug and lightbulb socket). The consultation also explores whether a "right to repair" defence against infringement should be adopted, allowing third parties to make spare parts for repairing a complex product so as to restore its original appearance.
Under current rules, designs of components that only form part of the design of the larger article, and are not made and sold separately (such as the handle of a cup) cannot qualify for protection on their own. Many other jurisdictions already allow the registration of partial designs, and the Government is considering whether Hong Kong should do the same.
Requirement of Novelty for Designs
Under the Ordinance, only "new" designs may be registered. A design is not considered new if it is the same as, or differs only in immaterial details from, an earlier design that has already been registered in Hong Kong or published anywhere in the world before the application date. Publication that destroys novelty can take many forms, including advertising, online disclosure, and prior use of the design.
The Government is considering whether an additional registrability requirement, such as "individual character" or "distinctiveness" as adopted in the European Union, the United Kingdom, and Australia, should supplement the existing novelty requirement. This would require a design to produce a different overall impression on an informed user when compared to existing designs, rather than simply differing in details. The rationale is that monopoly protection should be reserved for designs that genuinely enrich consumer choice and result from real creativity, and not those that are barely novel. The assessment would also take into account the degree of design freedom available in the relevant product sector. Where design freedom is highly constrained by the nature of the product or sector, smaller differences will suffice to establish individual character or distinctiveness.
Exclusive Rights of Registered Designs
The consultation paper also examines the scope of exclusive rights conferred on registered design owners and invites views on whether these rights remain adequate in today's commercial environment. Under the current regime, a registered design owner has the exclusive right to make or import for sale, hire or use in trade or business, or to sell, hire, or offer or expose for sale or hire in Hong Kong any articles to which the registered design has been applied, and the registered design owner may take action against anyone who does so without consent, subject to various statutory exceptions.
Should this scope be broadened? One option would be to adopt a broader scope of protection as in the European Union, the United Kingdom, and Australia, by using the term "the right to use the design" or "right to use such a product in any way for the purposes of any trade or business." The European Union has also recently introduced a specific right targeting emerging 3D printing technologies and AI-assisted copying, covering the creation, copying or distribution of any medium or software that records the design for the purpose of enabling a product to be made.
The Government is also considering whether existing statutory exceptions to infringement (including private and non-commercial uses, and certain acts done for specific purposes such as teaching) strike an appropriate balance between the rights of design owners and the interests of the public, and whether additional exceptions, such as exceptions for comment, critique, or parody, should be introduced.
The consultation paper also addresses the default ownership of commissioned designs: under current law, the person commissioning the design is presumed to be the original owner of the design, unless an agreement provides otherwise. The Government is proposing to reverse this position so that ownership vests in the designer unless there is any contractual arrangement to the contrary, bringing Hong Kong into line with the prevailing approach in Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the Industrial Design 5 Forum jurisdictions.
Alignment with the International Design Systems
On a broader systemic level, the Government is examining the potential extension of the Hague Agreement to Hong Kong. The Hague Agreement allows design owners to file a single international application with the World Intellectual Property Organization to seek territorial protection and manage their design rights across multiple jurisdictions through a one-stop process. China acceded to the Hague Agreement in 2022, though it has not yet been extended to Hong Kong. The consultation also takes account of the Riyadh Design Law Treaty ("RDLT"), concluded in November 2024 after nearly 20 years of international negotiation. The RDLT aims to harmonise and streamline the application and registration procedures for industrial designs globally and prescribes international standards for such procedures. Although the RDLT has yet to come into force, and China has yet to sign the same, the Government has drawn on these standards as forward-looking guidance for aligning the regime in Hong Kong with international best practices.
Looking Ahead
The consultation signals a desire to adapt and future proof the registered designs regime in Hong Kong. The wide range of issues under review underscores the Government's view that robust design protection is not simply a matter of legal formality, but an essential foundation for innovation, competitiveness, and economic development, particularly as Hong Kong advances its goals to be at the forefront of innovation in the digital economy of the new century.
Businesses across all sectors would be advised to begin assessing the potential impact of the proposed reforms on their operations, IP strategies, and commercial arrangements. If the scope of registrable designs is broadened, then a wider range of businesses would fall within the ambit of the registered designs regime. This could necessitate more comprehensive internal IP audits and the development of formal design registration policies, particularly for companies operating across multiple product lines or in sectors where design innovation is rapid. The outcome of this review will shape the landscape of design protection in Hong Kong for years to come, and early preparation will be essential for those wishing to capitalise on the opportunities and manage the risks that the modernised regime is likely to bring.
