EU looks at lookalikes

The EU Commission has published a report on "parasitic copying" by Hogan Lovells (or HogLove, as everyone now seems to be calling them).  For the benefit of those, like me, who cannot say precisely what parasitic copying is, the report adopts the following definition:
"parasitic copying refers to situations where a product is offered for sale in a packaging which resembles an already existing branded product, influencing consumer behaviour to its benefit, without infringing any intellectual property rights such as trade marks, design rights or copyright."
The headline report document itself is perhaps a bit bland, but there is a wealth of interesting information in the Annexes, particularly Annex 8 which contains a comparative exercise involving analysing four different sets of lookalike packaging across Bulgaria, Germany, the UK, Spain, Italy, and Sweden, with extensive references to case law on unfair competition, marketing practices legislation and so on.  Annex 6 is less detailed but contains a summary of the relevant laws across pretty much the whole of the EU.
The case studies indicate three different effects on the relevant consumers:

• Effect 1 - At least some of the consumers who purchase product B do so on the assumption that they are purchasing product A (even if they may realise after purchase that this is not the case) - i.e. classic "passing off";
• Effect 2 - At least some of the consumers who purchase product B do so on the assumption that products A and B have the same commercial origin, or come from economically linked undertakings (even if they may realise after purchase that this is not the case) - i.e. "association";
• Effect 3 - At least some of the consumers who purchase product B do so on the assumption that products A and B, having different commercial origins, are substitutes, being identical or highly similar in their specifications, nature and quality. As a result, price becomes the sole or main criterion under which the choice between the two products is to be made - i.e. erosion or dilution

The analyses show the protean nature of unfair competition - different cases, different states, different answers, and the German responses suggest (as I have heard from other sources) that it is becoming progressively more difficult to rely on unfair competition in lookalike cases.  As you would expect, it is in the area of "Effect 3" that there is the greatest difficulty, but (as we have commented in earlier posts here and here) having your distinctiveness eroded and your designs commodified is, for designers, quite a significant problem.
We clearly do not have a unified EU regime, nor do any of the countries studied appear to offer a perfect regime.  Should the EU attempt new law in this area?  Or would this do more harm than good?