Australia – Page 13 – IP Law Watch

Introducing Our ‘Fashion Law’ Newsletter

Oct 08 2014

“You can never be overdressed or overeducated.” Oscar Wilde

We are excited to announce the launch of Fashion Law, our bi-annual fashion newsletter. This newsletter, which comprises short articles, will discuss legal issues that impact the Australian fashion industry.

From top tips for Australian designers and fashion businesses to changes in laws overseas, Fashion Law will provide you with information on issues that directly affect your business.

Please click here to read the first edition of Fashion Law.

Further Amendments to Australian Patent Law Coming Soon

Oct 07 2014

Earlier this year, the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 2014 (2014 Bill) was introduced into Parliament by the Coalition Government. The Bill represents a revised version of the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 2013 (2013 Bill) introduced by the previous Labor Government. The 2013 Bill lapsed when the Federal Election was called in August 2013.

The most significant aspects of the 2014 Bill are as follows:

Introduction of a single patent attorney regulatory regime and a single patent application and examination process for Australia and New Zealand.
Enabling Australian pharmaceutical manufacturers to apply to the Federal Court for a compulsory licence to manufacture generic versions of patented drugs to supply to developing countries. Read More

Have the Bubblies Popped for Champagne Jayne?

Sep 30 2014

Rachel ‘Champagne Jayne’ Powell’s passion for Champagne has helped her to become an award-winning wine expert, broadcaster, journalist and presenter. However, Ms. Powell’s ‘Champagne Jayne’ brand has put her at loggerheads with the trade organisation established to manage the common interests of the growers and the Champagne Houses behind the drink she loves so much. Read More

Special Leave Sought to Appeal Gene Sequencing Decision to the High Court of Australia

Sep 25 2014

We recently reported on the decision by a five judge bench of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) which found that Myriad Genetics Inc’s patent covering the isolated BRCA1 gene is valid. The Full Court unanimously rejected an appeal by Ms. Yvonne D’Arcy from a decision by Justice Nicholas at first instance. Read our alert here.

It is now being reported that Ms. D’Arcy has sought special leave to appeal the decision to the High Court of Australia (High Court).

Limping Trade Marks and Distinctiveness in Australia

Sep 24 2014

Oyster Bay’s Wine Bottle Trade Mark Application Rejected

In 2012, New Zealand winery Oyster Bay filed a trade mark application as follows:

Australian Patent Examination Reports Issuing Faster Than Expected in Some Technology Areas

Sep 12 2014

Prior to commencement of the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012, which came into effect in April 2013, the Australian Patent Office was inundated with requests for examination from applicants wishing to have their applications examined under the current law.

This flood of examination requests led the Patent Office to last year advise that first examination reports would likely issue, on average, about 19 months after examination is requested. We have recently been advised by the Patent Office that the backlog of applications awaiting examination is starting to clear and that examination reports are now issuing, on average, about 16 months after examination is requested. Read More

Not a Free For All on Compilations! Big Additional Damages Payout

Sep 11 2014

Dynamic Supplies Pty Limited v Tonnex International Pty Limited (No.3) [2014] FCA 909

In the liability hearing of this matter (Dynamic Supplies Pty Limited v Tonnex International Pty Limited (2001) 91 IPR 488) Justice Yates found that:

the respondent, Tonnex, had infringed the copyright owned by the applicant, Dynamic, in a computer compatibility chart for printer and computer consumables called the ‘March 2008 CSV file’ (Copyright Work) in breach of the Copyright Act 1968 by reproducing a substantial part of the Copyright Work in its document called ‘Tonnex 2008’
Tonnex had contravened ss 52, 53(c) and 53(eb) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth).

No Interlocutory Injunction? No Sweat

Sep 09 2014

Unilever Australia Ltd v Revlon Australia Pty Ltd (no.2) [2014] FCA 875

This case is the latest skirmish between two personal product giants, Unilever and Revlon, before war breaks out on 15 September 2014 when the trial begins.

The case concerns ‘clinical’ anti-perspirant deodorant products; Revlon’s product sold under the brand name Mitchum Clinical and Unilever’s products sold under the brand names ‘Rexona’ and ‘Dove’.

The first interlocutory injunction hearing was brought by Unilever against Revlon in May 2014 concerned misleading representations alleged to have been made by Revlon in advertising. On balance, the Court refused to grant the injunction as it would have a serious adverse impact on the worldwide marketing campaign for Revlon and the trial could be held in July 2014. The July trial was eventually adjourned to 15 September 2014. Read More

Australian Courts Confirm Status Quo for Patenting Gene Sequences

Sep 05 2014

Today, a five-judge bench of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia unanimously decided that Myriad Genetics Inc’s (Myriad) patent covering the isolated BRCA1 gene (Patent) is valid.

In Yvonne D’Arcy v Myriad Genetics Inc & Anor (5 September 2014) the Full Federal Court rejected the reasoning of the U.S. Supreme Court, when it found in 2013 that certain claims of a closely related U.S. Patent of Myriad were invalid as the claim to isolated nucleic acid was a claim to a “product of nature” and not patentable subject matter.

For the pro-patent lobby and the biotech industry, this is good news for innovation in life sciences in Australia.

Are you Ready for Commencement of New Zealand’s New Patents Act?

Aug 30 2014

New Zealand patent law has been completely overhauled and modernised. Details of the changes can be found here. The new law commences on 13 September 2014, which is only two weeks away!

The new provisions raise the requirements for patentability and the requirements for patent specifications and bring New Zealand patent law into substantial conformity with the patent laws of other developed countries, such as Australia. Among the new provisions is a provision which denies patentability to alleged inventions where the contribution to the art lies solely in it being a computer program. Read More

Tag:Australia