Core77

UK Finally Gets With the Furniture Design Copyright Times

Britons have just six months left to buy knockoffs of out-of-copyright design classics

By Rain Noe - August 17, 2016

in Furniture Design | Design Business

By one estimate, there are 54 factories in China producing unlicensed replicas of Eames furniture. While they'll probably find a ready market all around the world—$520 for a knockoff Eames Lounge vs. $8,900 for the real deal makes it a no-brainer for the unscrupulous—in the UK they'll find a ready market and no police intervention.

That's because Britain's design copyright laws deviate wildly from the European Union's. In the UK, the rule was that 25 years after a designer dies, his work goes into the public domain. Charles Eames passed in 1978 while co-designer and wife Ray passed ten years later, so it's been legal to sell Eames knockoffs since 2013. For the EU, however, the rule is 70 years after a designer's death.

Enter a caption (optional)

Well, British lawmakers are finally getting with the times. Yielding to pressure from international furniture manufacturers, they've finally stretched it to the EU-standard 70 years, conferring the same protection to mass-produced furniture as is enjoyed by artistic works, books and sound recordings.

It was recently announced that all knock-off/replica furniture manufacturers selling in the UK have just six months to liquidate their stock, because after that, the hammer's coming down. Britons who aren't picky about the provenance of their design classics have until the end of January 2017 to get their unlicensed Eameses, Jacobsens and Casitglionis on the cheap. And ironically, that may drive the price up.

Via The Guardian and the UK Copyright Service

o

Favorite This
Q
7

Comment

Comments

David Phuah

8 years ago

Z

2Z

Reply

I’m with the others. design should be accessible. Although protection should be afforded to designers these designs have reached iconic status and I doubt people will be confused when they see the furniture in "everyday" households.

Meanwhile smaller designers get they items ripped of all the time!

!Report as spam
Ann Bell

8 years ago

Z

1Z

Reply

thank you for sharing this, I also would like to check my personal blog , for example http://theproreviews.com/cheap-sectional-sofas/,

!Report as spam
Brad Stebbing

8 years ago

Z

1Z

Reply

A lot of people here seem to think that these designs should be "accessible". While I agree with this in principle, the replica market does not pay for any of the R&D, marketing or support to the designer that these original companies did. If these costs were factored in to the "replica" market, you would have a different pricing proposition. The knock offs are selling a reproduction of a design they already know will sell with virtually no risk. If this continues, firstly there is no incentive for companies to differentiate themselves by actually investing in design, and secondly there is a much larger issue that these companies devalue the designer furniture industry - ie. if a consumer is used to paying $200 for a designer stool for the 60s, why on earth would they pay $400 for a stool by a modern designer (who is already making no margin on that figure as they don't have the numbers for mass production.
If you asked most people for $10 for a burnt copy of a Michael Jackson CD, they would more than likely say no as it is a pirated copy - even though the quality of the music on that CD is great. The same goes for replica furniture, even if the quality is great, the one part of the entire cost equation of that piece of furniture that the consumer is NOT paying for the the DESIGN - which ironically is probably their main motivation to want to purchase the piece of furniture in the first place!

!Report as spam
Clay Davis

8 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

So what was originally designed to be accessible by average people should only be the realm of the wealthy now? I'm sure the designers trying to create mass produced designs would be happy to see companies selfishly profiting of their passion. I'm all for the originals being originals, but steeping the price for them for no reason is ridiculous.

!Report as spam
peter eller

8 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

IP Law only stifles innovation and creativity. and you can't incentivise designers after they are dead.

!Report as spam
Mrten Boi

8 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

Can you explain how this is a good thing? I'm not trolling here, genuinely interested.

From where I'm standing: I'm sure Eames doesn't care, and the people that actually buy the chairs can't be too happy, either, with a 17 times price hike, if you'd ignore the Venblen effect.

But does design really need to be a Venblen good? Or only if it's "iconic"? And if so, who decides?

!Report as spam
John Kestner

8 years ago

Z

Z

Reply

Is this a good idea? While I have a soft spot for designer furniture, seeing Disney regularly get the expiration dates extended never sat well with me, especially since it has made a lot of money off of public domain stories.

!Report as spam