Lookalikes are not a marketing accident. They are a litigation risk.

In Islestarr Holdings Ltd v Aldi Stores Ltd, the High Court of England and Wales examined whether a budget powder compact sold by Aldi copied the distinctive design used by Charlotte Tilbury.

The background is familiar in the cosmetics market. Aldi is known for offering affordable “dupe” alternatives to high end beauty products, often using similar packaging at a fraction of the price.

The brand owner argued that Aldi had reproduced two artistic works:

- the “Starburst Design” on the compact lid

- the embossed starburst pattern in the powder

The court agreed. Both designs qualified as copyright protected artistic works and Aldi had reproduced a substantial part of them.

One interesting issue was whether a temporary design could be protected. The powder embossing disappears with use, but the court held that it still qualified for copyright because it reproduced a three dimensional version of an original drawing.

Why does this matter beyond the UK?

The court relied on the originality standard developed by the CJEU in Infopaq, asking whether the design reflected the author’s own intellectual creation. The palette’s distinctive art deco style and the creative choices involved in its design were considered sufficient.

For brand owners, this highlights a practical enforcement question: when does similarity in packaging become worth litigating?

Takeaway: enforcement starts long before a dispute. If packaging and visual identity are central to a brand, they should be clearly defined, protected and documented as legal assets from day one.