Exploring the Challenges of Intellectual Property Rights in the Era of 3D Printing: A Comparative Legal Perspective from Iran and the European Union

Authors

    Mahnoush Zoghi Department of Law, Sh.q., Islamic Azad University, Shar-e-qods, Iran
    Soheil Taheri * Department of Law, Sh.q., Islamic Azad University, Share-qods, Iran s.taheri@qodsiau.ac.ir
    Pezhman Piruzi Department of Law, Sh.q., Islamic Azad University, Shar-e-qods, Iran
    Hossein Monvari Department of Law, Sh.q., Islamic Azad University, Shar-e-qods, Iran

Keywords:

Intellectual Property Rights, Legal Perspective, Digital Designs

Abstract

Three-dimensional (3D) printing is revolutionizing the realm of production by empowering consumers and small businesses to fabricate complex objects from digital designs. However, this technology blurs the boundaries between digital files and physical products, introducing novel challenges for intellectual property (IP) law. This article investigates how Iran and the European Union (EU) are responding to the intellectual property issues emerging from 3D printing, focusing on copyright, patent law, industrial designs, trademark rights, as well as enforcement mechanisms and liability regimes. In the EU, IP protection is governed by detailed directives and regulations—such as the Copyright Directive 2001/29/EC, the Community Design Regulation 6/2002, the Trademark Regulation 207/2009, and the Enforcement Directive 2004/48—and is committed to international treaties including TRIPS and the Berne Convention. In contrast, Iran’s IP framework is based on older legal statutes, notably the Law for the Protection of Authors, Composers, and Artists (1969) and the Law on Registration of Patents, Industrial Designs and Trademarks (2007), and is subject to limited international obligations. Iran is a member of the Paris Convention and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), but not of the Berne Convention, the WIPO Copyright Treaty, or TRIPS. Key differences emerge: for example, EU law generally does not consider the private and non-commercial reproduction of IP-protected objects as an infringement, whereas Iranian law explicitly excludes inventions “contrary to Islamic principles, public order, or morality” from patentability, and likewise restricts trademarks that violate Islamic norms. Drawing on case studies, academic analyses, and official sources (e.g., WIPO, European Commission), we identify the legal gaps in each system and propose reforms. Our comparative analysis underscores the need for legal updates and international cooperation to enable IP law to accommodate the paradigm of digital manufacturing in both jurisdictions.

References

ASIAIP. (2024). The Expanding Reach of Iran's Intellectual Property Law. AsiaIP.

Baghery, H. R., & Hassan, K. (2012). E-Commerce and Consumer Protection in Iran: A Legal Framework. Int'l Business Mgmt., 6, 317-324. https://doi.org/10.3923/ibm.2012.317.324

Clyde Co. (2024, April). The EU's New Product Liability Directive.

Europe Parliament/Council. Directive 2001/29/EC; Regulation (EC) 6/2002; Directive 98/71/EC; Regulation (EU) 2017/1001; Directive 2004/48/EC; Directive 2000/31/EC, etc. In.

European Commission. (2001). Directive 2001/95/EC on General Product Safety. Official Journal of the European Union, 7.

European Commission. (2016a). Intellectual Property and 3D Printing: A Study. 22.

European Commission. (2016b). Overview of 3D Printing & Intellectual Property Law.

European Commission. (2019). Directive 2019/790 on Digital Single Market and Copyright. Official Journal of the European Union, 30.

European Commission. (2024). Directive on Product Liability and Digital Products. Official Journal of the European Union, 10.

European Court of, J. (2015). Case C-395/14 - European Designs and Copyrights. ECJ Judgments, 40.

European Patent Office. (2023). European Patent Convention and the Patent System. 15.

European, U. (2017). Regulation 2017/1001 on the European Union Trademark. Official Journal of the European Union, 3.

Harakenzo International Patent Firm. (2024). Iran - Intellectual Property Overview.

Hasan, J. A. E. (2024, 22 Nov.). Iran enacts new IP law and fee increase.

International Treaties. Berne Convention (1886), TRIPS Agreement (1994), WIPO Copyright Treaty (1996), Paris Convention (1883), etc. (as updated). In.

Library of, C. (2017, 7 Nov.). Iran: New Copyright Law to Be Submitted to Parliament.

Malaty, E., & Rostama, G. (2017). 3D Printing and IP Law. WIPO Magazine.

Margoni, T. (2016). The Limitations of Current Industrial Design Law. EIPR, 126.

Mendis, R. (2015). 3D Printing Platforms and User Behavior. Journal of Technology and Innovation, 215.

Piper, D. L. A. (2015, June). Legal challenges of 3D printing.

Rideout, S., & Wong, L. (2015). Digital Design Files and Copyright Law. Journal of Intellectual Property Law, 78.

Schuman, G., & Rezai, A. S. (2020). Product Liability in Iran. Loc. Law Libr. Pub.

Spark, A. (2016). EU Law on 3D Printing: A Comprehensive Review. 48-52.

World Intellectual Property Organization. WIPO - WIPO Lex Databases (laws and treaties).

Downloads

Published

2025-03-25

Submitted

2024-11-10

Revised

2025-02-01

Accepted

2025-02-10

How to Cite

Zoghi, M. ., Taheri, S., Piruzi, P. ., & Monvari, H. . (2025). Exploring the Challenges of Intellectual Property Rights in the Era of 3D Printing: A Comparative Legal Perspective from Iran and the European Union. Legal Studies in Digital Age, 4(1), 1-10. https://www.jlsda.com/index.php/lsda/article/view/151

Similar Articles

1-10 of 118

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.