Tag:Australia

1
Australian Government Reveals Plan to Crackdown on Online Piracy – but not too Hard!
2
Apple Denied App Store Trade Mark in Australia
3
High Court of Australia Decides Landmark Trade Mark Case
4
The Great Bottle Battle – Coke vs Pepsi
5
Safe and Sound
6
AUD50,000+ Reasons for Employees to Think Twice About Their Employer’s Copyright Works and Confidential Information
7
Business Method Patents in Australia: Mere Computer Implementation Not Enough
8
UK Trade Mark Owners win Landmark Case Against ISPs
9
High Court Confirms That Extension of Time Provisions Apply to Requests for Pharmaceutical Extensions of Term
10
Downloaded Dallas Buyers Club? The Bill is in the Mail

Australian Government Reveals Plan to Crackdown on Online Piracy – but not too Hard!

The Australian Government announced last week that it will implement measures proposed by Attorney General, George Brandis, and the Australian Minister for Communications, Malcolm Turnbull, to reduce “high levels of online copyright infringement”.

The announcement is timely – given the owners of the film Dallas Buyers Club issue of proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia in November, against five internet service providers (ISPs) including iiNet, seeking orders to have the ISPs disclose the identities of alleged pirates. Read More

Apple Denied App Store Trade Mark in Australia

It has been a bumper week for IP decisions in Australia. Earlier, we reported on the Coke v Pepsi and Cantarella decisions. Now, in a third major judgment, the Federal Court of Australia (Federal Court) has refused registration of Apple’s trade mark application for APP STORE in Australia.

Apple Inc. v Registrar of Trade Marks [2014] FCA 1304 was an appeal from a decision by the Registrar of Trade Marks (Registrar). The Registrar found that the trade mark APP STORE was ‘purely’, ‘directly’ or ‘inherently’ descriptive, as it would be well understood by modern digital-savvy consumers to refer to a ‘store’ that sells or provides ‘apps’. Read More

High Court of Australia Decides Landmark Trade Mark Case

Decision in Cantarella Bros Pty Ltd v Modena Trading Pty Ltd Clarifies Test for Distinctiveness of Trade Marks in Australia

This week, the High Court of Australia (High Court) handed down only its third decision considering trade mark issues since the enactment of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth). This decision could make it easier to register foreign language words as trade marks.

Read More

The Great Bottle Battle – Coke vs Pepsi

Coke Loses its Action Against Pepsi Based on its Iconic Contour Bottle

The Coca-Cola Company v Pepsico Inc & Ors (No 2) [2014] FCA 1287

On 28 November 2014, the Federal Court of Australia dismissed claims of trade mark infringement, misleading and deceptive conduct and passing off made by The Coca-Cola Company (Coke) against Pepsico Inc, Pepsico Australia Holdings Pty Ltd, and Schweppes Australia Pty Ltd, the manufacturer and distributor of Pepsico Inc products in Australia (collectively referred to as Pepsi). Read More

Safe and Sound

Sound Marks in Australia

In September, IP Australia accepted for registration a trade mark described as “the Trade Mark consists of the sound of a fictitious character saying the word “Simples!” followed by a squeaking sound such as might be expected to be made by a Meerkat or other small animal”. You can listen to this trade mark here.  This application was filed for an array of goods and services by the UK company BGL Group Limited. Read More

AUD50,000+ Reasons for Employees to Think Twice About Their Employer’s Copyright Works and Confidential Information

Employees often like to take a little with them when leaving employment, some might say as a ‘memento’, others might say as outright theft of the intellectual property of their employer.  In a recent decision, an ex employee was ordered to pay his former employer AUD50,000 in damages for copying over 60GB of data prior to leaving his job to work for a competitor.

Read More

Business Method Patents in Australia: Mere Computer Implementation Not Enough

Research Affiliates LLC v Commissioner of Patents [2014] FCAFC 150

On 10 November 2014, the Australian Full Federal Court (Court) held that a method of creating an index of securities using a standard computer was a ‘scheme’, and, hence, not a patentable invention.

The Court applied the Australian High Court test from National Research Development Corporation v Commissioner of Patents (1959) 102 CLR 252 that a patentable invention must produce an “artificially created state of affairs”. The Court said that this test is not satisfied by mechanistic application of artificiality or physical effect, but by understanding the claimed invention as a matter of substance not form. Read More

UK Trade Mark Owners win Landmark Case Against ISPs

ISPs Ordered to Block Websites Selling Counterfeit Products

In a landmark decision, a judge of the High Court of Justice, England and Wales has ruled that internet service providers (ISPs) in the United Kingdom may be ordered to take all reasonable steps to prevent or restrict access to websites selling counterfeit goods.

The case was brought by luxury brand owner Compagnie Financiere Richemont SA (Richemont), which relevantly owns the Cartier and Montblanc brands and associated trade marks, against the five largest ISPs in the United Kingdom.

Read More

High Court Confirms That Extension of Time Provisions Apply to Requests for Pharmaceutical Extensions of Term

In a recent decision, the High Court of Australia has ruled that the extension of time provisions of the Australian Patents Act 1990 (Act) can be used to extend the time for requesting an extension of term of a patent relating to a pharmaceutical substance.

The dispute was based on a request by Lundbeck to extend the term of Australian patent 623144.  The extension of term request was filed after the applicable deadline and was, therefore, accompanied by an application for an extension of time.  Read More

Downloaded Dallas Buyers Club? The Bill is in the Mail

The film Dallas Buyers Club won critical acclaim and earned Matthew McConaughey and Jared Leto Academy Awards for Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor respectively. Now the rights holder of the film, Dallas Buyers Club LLC, is looking to pursue Australians who it believes have illegally downloaded the film.

The company has issued proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia against iiNet Limited and four other internet service providers, seeking orders to have them disclose the identities of the alleged pirates. iiNet has indicated that it will defend the action. Read More

Copyright © 2024, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.