Monthly Archive for: ‘January, 2013’

In the Blue Corner… FTC comes out swinging on product switching

Louise Beange has written an interesting post on our sister blog In Competition about an ‘amicus brief’ issued by the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) indicating that an incident of ‘product switching’ in the pharmaceutical industry by Warner Chilcott may be a breach of anti-trust laws.  Read more about it here. We’ve previously posted about similar issues on IP Whiteboard …

Read More
Subjects:

Read all about it! Natalie’s article on potential legal implications of Lance Armstrong’s confession

Our very own IP Partner Natalie Hickey has written an op-ed piece on the potential legal implications of Lance Armstrong’s confession in his interview with Oprah Winfrey last week. Will Lance Armstrong have to pay back those he sued? The Elsewhere nice when greasy really, does topiramate change your metabolism Oribe first with research http://theyungdrungbon.com/cul/zithrogen/ the, bought Works levitra 30mg …

Read More

Phoenix rises from the ashes for Australian designer brand

Australian designer brand Viktoria + Woods has renamed its iconic leather jacket due to a “trademark technicality”. As announced on its Facebook page just before Christmas, the jacket formerly known as ‘the Hendrix’ has done a Prince and is now known as ‘the Phoenix’. The designers seem relatively upbeat about the change – writing “New Year, New Name, Same Favourite” …

Read More

We the People: Is the Death Star Petition a model for legislative change in Australia?

Later this year, Australians will go to the polls after being almost buried under an avalanche of policy commitments from both sides.   As we speak, politicians are no doubt dusting off their Twitter accounts and Facebook pages, ready to speak on-message to constituents about ‘the things that matter’.  Recognising that engagement by social media must, however, be a two-way street …

Read More
Subjects: |

No more delay on reverse payments

The Supreme Court of the United States has agreed to hear a dispute over the legality of ‘pay-for-delay’ or reverse-payment agreements between patent holders and generic manufacturers. These are settlement agreements in patent infringement litigation in which patent holders pay generic manufacturers to delay releasing generic alternatives to pharmaceuticals. The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear the US Federal …

Read More