Monthly Archive for: ‘November, 2011’
Regular people ask “If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”
IP lawyers ask “If a trade mark is used but no one can see it, has the trade mark been infringed?”
According to Justice Kenny of the Federal Court, in this recent decision, the answer to this philosophical IP question is, no.
The Intellectual Property Office (‘IPO’) in the UK has issued a preliminary ruling which states that the iconic ‘Cadbury purple’ – Pantone 2865c – is sufficiently distinctive to enable Cadbury to register it as a trade mark.
Justice Jagot rejects ‘manifestly absurd and unreasonable’ construction of new copyright exemption for PI documents
When Justice Jagot handed down her judgment in Sanofi-Aventis Australia Pty Ltd v Apotex Pty Ltd (No 3) in August this year (read our Alert here, her Honour found that Apotex’s proposed supply of a generic leflunomide product would infringe Sanofi’s patent. Her Honour also found that Apotex had infringed the copyright in Sanofi’s leflunomide product information (“PI”). Un
Members of British and European royal families have contributed to many legal developments over the past few years.
Dr Alexander: “They’re both mine.”
Royal Children’s Hospital: “No, they’re both mine.”
Commissioner of Patents: “Stop fighting – you can each have one.”
There is certainly a lot of commentary, and legal ink, spilled on the subject of software patents (including on the IP Whiteboard!). And when we negotiate technology agreements, the IP infringement clause is often highly contentious because neither side wants to bear the almost-impossible-to-quantify-in-advance risk of a third party patent infringement claim.