I'm glad to see someone highlight the fact that design patents are inherently illogical, and in fact run altogether counter to the purpose of the patent system.
Too often this is obscured, and/or all patents are lumped together as being generally awful. I personally do not ascribe to the notion that all patents should be outright abolished.
Design patents, however, should simply not exist. Rounded corners, rectangles and UI elements in rows of 4 are simply not inventions.
To be really pedantic about it, it's arguable that they are inventions (someone had to be the first to put four rocks in a row), but it's such a blindly obvious "invention" that it's insanely laughable to afford it any kind of protections at all.
Design patents aren't for inventions. They are like trademarks, ornamental figures that are protected from impersonation, sort of like a policemans uniform.
Anything functional is expressly out of scope for a design patent.
What types of protection do you suggest a country implement to protect design/form? Trademark, copyright, and trade dress protection will not cover "design objects". If Louis Vuitton were to come out with a new fall handbag, what would they use to protect Gucci from duplicating their design and selling it under Gucci's brand?
Fashion items, along with things like recipes and the plots of novels, are categorically excluded from patent protection, including design patents. You can copy that handbag all you want, as long as you don't violate the trademark on the label.
Software, being a fundamentally creative enterprise, should be included. It doesn't fit into the patent system for the same reason that granting a monopoly on a plot twist makes no sense.
Too often this is obscured, and/or all patents are lumped together as being generally awful. I personally do not ascribe to the notion that all patents should be outright abolished.
Design patents, however, should simply not exist. Rounded corners, rectangles and UI elements in rows of 4 are simply not inventions.