Introduction
The 3-Dimensional (“3D”) printer was developed around forty years back, originally for industrial purposes. However, with continuous advancements, not only has this technology become much more accessible but also cost-effective. Recent developments in India showcase its expanding utility among numerous sectors, ranging from production of weapons, construction of luxury villas, and establishment of post offices. Despite its rapid growth, the challenge of safeguarding 3D-printed designs under the Designs Act, 2000 (“the Act”) is now surfacing. In the process, 3D printer primarily utilizes a Computer-Aided Design (“CAD”) to create 3D products by layering. This method, also referred to as additive manufacturing, involves laying down thin layers of materials like plastics, composites, or biomaterials in liquid form. These layers are then amalgamated and refined to develop products with distinct features.
It is key to note that the CAD files utilized in their digital form make it extremely convenient to replicate and circulate the designs online. The obscurity in tracking unauthorized sharing arises because these files can spread rapidly throughout digital platforms, making it tricky to pin down the source of any unauthorized usage. Enforcement becomes tougher since creation can happen at any place, and India’s prevailing IP laws principally guard the physical form of designs, not the digital forms themselves.
This article pursues two main objectives: firstly, to evaluate the present regulatory framework for protecting 3D-printed designs in India and identify existing gaps; and secondly, to analyse parallel regulations in other jurisdictions, highlighting the gaps and proposing strategies to enhance protections for 3D-printed designs.
Scope Of Protection Under The Indian Framework
A design can include several aspects like appearance, decorative pattern, shape, or size. In India, the primary objective of the Act is to protect the visual dimensions of objects that are not purely functional. Section 2(d) of the Act confines the scope of a design by concentrating on definite features that distinguish an article. It comprises the shape, configuration, pattern, ornamentation, or arrangement of lines or colours applied to an article. These features can exist in either two-dimensional or three-dimensional forms, or both. The design must be formed through an industrial process, which can be manual, mechanical, or chemical. The design must appeal visually and be judged solely by its appearance when observed with the naked eye. Section 4 of the Act further restrains registration in cases that lack originality, or uniqueness, are obscene, or have already been disclosed in public.
India follows a “first-to-file rule” for the registrability of design. Hence, once a design is registered, it gives the owner a legal right to bring an action against any natural or legal entity, that infringes the design right to stop such exploitation and to claim any damage to which the registered proprietor is legally entitled. However, it is pertinent to note that when the design is not registered under the Act, there is no legal recourse for infringement under this Act.
Limitations In The Current Framework
With the rising usage of 3D printing, the reproduction of registered designs without authorization has become much easier. Once a digital file of a design is created or accessed, anyone with a 3D printer can replicate the design without the original creator’s consent. This capability severely impedes the enforcement of exclusive rights, as it enables accurate copies of secured designs to be produced swiftly for low costs. Micolube India Limited vs. Saurabh Industries clarified that the articles fall into the public domain once the protection period for patents and designs expires. Further, the law merely safeguards the tangible aspect of a registered design, not its digital representation. Consequently, CAD files that contain design specifications can be shared, manipulated, and replicated without constraints. This worry aligns with the findings made in Microfibers Inc. vs. Girdhar & Co., which tackles the restricted nature of protection conferred to designs and emphasizes their physical depiction rather than their digital equivalents. The case stresses a critical need to update IP laws to encompass protections for digital design files, which are becoming progressively significant in today’s manufacturing divisions.
Moreover, the Act also does not recognize the personal, non-commercial use of a design to be an infringement, even if it entails producing 3D-printed copies of a protected design. This exemption creates a loophole where individuals can legally replicate designs for personal use, making it harder for IP holders to regulate their designs. Furthermore, 3D printing’s global availability empowers anyone replicate protected designs, challenging traditional jurisdictional boundaries. IP rights secured in one country may be infringed in another, often leaving the rights holder with limited legal recourses. As observed in Reckitt Benkiser India Ltd. v. Wyeth Ltd., the definitions of ‘publication’ and ‘infringement’ can differ across jurisdictions, hindering international liability. These challenges emphasize the need for modernized laws encompassing digital files, addressing non-commercial loopholes, and bolstering cross-border enforcement.
Cross-Jurisdictional Analysis
Nations worldwide, particularly the United States (“US”), the European Union (“EU”), and Japan have made noteworthy efforts to address IP concerns associated with 3D printing. The US has taken the initiative to extend copyright law to encompass digital forms like CAD files under certain circumstances. For instance, when these files contain distinguishing, and artistic elements beyond merely functional data, they may become eligible for copyright protection. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) allows the creators to swiftly remove the unauthorized digital content over the internet. This empowers the IP rights holders to regulate the replication or sharing of their designs digitally.
Further, recently, the altered version of the EU’s Directive and Regulation on the Protection of Designs obtained the definitive endorsement of the Council of the European Union. Hence, the amended definitions of “designs” and “products” now comprise digital constructions as well as 3D printed designs. This broadened scope now recognizes not only the ultimate objects in physical forms but also the innovation that led to the creation of a digital design. Moreover, the EU’s framework confers automatic protection even to the ‘unregistered designs’ for a period of up to three years. This is imperative for industries that utilise 3D printing due to its ability to be replicated in a jiffy.
Likewise, the legislative framework governing IP law has significantly evolved in Japan. The amendment introduced in the Design Act in 2020 widened the scope of protection conferred to digital components to also include “graphic user interfaces,” and “electronic demonstration.” The continuous modernizations of its laws indicate a forward-looking approach to keep pace with the advancing technology.
Potential Solutions For India
Despite significant advancements in IP laws in India, certain gaps in the current regulatory framework hinder the fulfilment of its primary objectives. By analysing parallel frameworks in foreign jurisdictions and adopting necessary changes, India can better address the challenges posed by 3D printing on IP protection. One primary step will be to amend the Act to inculcate explicit protections for digital design files. Widening its scope to encompass digital files will help extend IP rights beyond mere tangible forms.
Further, establishing a framework to ‘Register CAD files’ under the Act may aid in providing a formal identification of files in their digital formats which are ultimately utilized for 3D printing. This will help the IP rights holders to register their innovation in both, physical and digital forms, ultimately making the enforcement easier. Additionally, establishing a framework to ‘license’ digital files will further allow the creators to regulate the usage of their design. A creator may also impose restrictions to avoid any changes in his original work and to allow the reproduction only to the agreed terms. This will benefit both the creators as well as buyers where the former will receive recognition for their work and the latter will receive lawful access.
Furthermore, it is pertinent to raise awareness of IP rights among both, the creators and the consumers for its effective implementation. When the stakeholders are able to understand their rights and duties, they better understand the infringement consequences. These reforms offer an overarching protection to both digital files and the ultimate physical products.
The Way Forward
3D printing is an innovation that our preceding generations never fathomed. With progressing technology arises the need to regulate it as well. The chief objective of the framework in India, is to grant creators the rights and recognition they deserve. However, changing times, reveal inadequacies the present laws that hinder its objectives. A comparative analysis of Design laws in the US, EU, and Japan offers intriguing insights for India to identify the existing insufficiencies and alter them to fulfil its objective.
To optimally harness the potential of 3D printing, the laws must upgrade at the same pace as the technological advancements. Hence, it is pertinent to protect CAD files in digital forms and also register and license them for stronger protection. It is also crucial to protect both registered and non-registered designs in cases of 3D printing due to its widespread accessibility and low costs. The future of 3D printing and designs in India is dependent on advancements in both technologies and regulatory frameworks.
(This post has been authored by Tanvi Dawrani, a final-year student at National Law University, Delhi)
CITE AS: Tanvi Dawrani ‘Strengthening IP Protection for 3D-Printed Designs in India’ (The Contemporary Law Forum, 10 September 2025) <https://tclf.in/2025/09/10/strengthening-ip-protection-for-3d-printed-designs-in-india/> date of access.