The determination of similarity of designs is a central issue in the protection of industrial designs, layout designs of integrated circuits, and utility models, as it directly relates to the question of infringement and originality. The concept of similarity is not confined to exact imitation but extends to substantial resemblance that may deceive or confuse an informed observer. Various legal systems and judicial interpretations have developed criteria to assess whether two designs are similar, focusing on visual appearance, overall impression, and the perspective of the relevant observer. One of the primary criteria is the overall visual impression created by the designs. Instead of comparing minute details in isolation, courts and authorities examine the design as a whole. Even if there are minor differences in specific elements, a design may still be considered similar if the general appearance and aesthetic effect are substantially the same. This principle ensures that infringers cannot escape liability by making trivial or insignificant changes. The emphasis is placed on the cumulative effect of the design features, including shape, configuration, pattern, ornamentation, and color. Another important criterion is the perspective of the “informed user” or “average consumer.” This hypothetical observer is neither a design expert nor a completely uninformed person but someone who has some familiarity with the type of product concerned. The similarity is assessed based on whether such a person would find the two designs to be substantially the same or confusingly similar. This approach balances technical precision with practical perception, ensuring that the test reflects real-world conditions in the marketplace. The nature and purpose of the article to which the design is applied also play a significant role. Designs applied to functional or utilitarian objects may have limited scope for variation, and therefore even small differences might be sufficient to distinguish them. Conversely, in products where aesthetic features dominate, a higher degree of variation may be required to avoid similarity. Thus, the degree of freedom available to the designer is an important factor in determining similarity. If the designer’s freedom is restricted by functional or technical constraints, even minor similarities