Category Archive for: ‘Subjects’

Don’t you wanna dance with me? US Supreme Court to hear Amgen v Sandoz biosimilars case

The US Supreme Court has granted petitions for certiorari in Amgen v. Sandoz confirming that the Court will examine the operation of the “patent dance” regime under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), as well as clarifying when notice of commercial marketing can be given. Biosimilar boffins and patent pedants will be (justifiably) excited. Who Dances …

Read More
Subjects:

Would you like rights with that? The real reason behind In-N-Out’s periodic pop-ups?

In-N-Out has again given bloggers and Instagrammers heart palpitations by opening a pop-up restaurant in Sydney for ONE DAY ONLY, leaving burger lovers from other parts of the country (including the author of this article) seething with jealousy — something that doesn’t often happen when non-Sydneysiders think of Sydney. By the way, if you’re reading this and interested in wrapping …

Read More
Partner:

Productivity Commission’s final report pulls no punches on patents

Yesterday the Productivity Commission published its final report on Australia’s IP system. Our high level summary of the Commission’s recommendations across all aspects of the IP system can be found here. The Commission sees the patent system as tipped in favour of patent owners and its recommendations are designed to restore balance. This post provides an outline of the key …

Read More
Subjects: |
Partner:

Counter-productive? Australia’s Productivity Commission releases Final Report into Australia’s Intellectual Property Arrangements

Yesterday, Australia’s Productivity Commission released their Final Report into Australia’s Intellectual Property Arrangements. This report was sent to Government on 23 September 2016. The Government is carrying out additional public consultation in relation to the recommendations made in the Final Report, which differ in key respects from some of the Commission’s draft recommendations. You can make a submission here – …

Read More
Partner:

The overarching purpose – misuse of confidential information, copyright infringement and the power of section 37M of the Federal Court of Australia Act

Earlier this week, Justice Moshinsky handed down judgment in SAI Global Property Division Pty Ltd v Johnstone [2016] FCA 1333, a confidential information and copyright infringement case involving a former employee of SAI, which is an important reminder in relation to the conduct of litigation generally. Background SAI is a leading provider in Australia of integrated search, settlement and conveyancing software …

Read More

Levi’s stitches up win in jeans pocket case

You pick up a pair of jeans in the store, and you inspect the back pockets. (Is there anyone that doesn’t select jeans based on what is on the back pockets?) What brand of jeans are you holding? The answer would be obvious to many. They’re LEVI’S jeans. You could tell whether the word mark LEVI’S was there or not. …

Read More
Subjects:

Hand over the ouzo and no one gets hurt – Little Greek Taverna enjoins use of Little Greek Cuzina, and a Cheeky restaurant case from the UK

The owner of a registration for the LITTLE GREEK TAVERNA logo (below left) has obtained an interlocutory injunction enjoining the use of LITTLE GREEK CUZINA (below right) by two Brisbane restaurants*.          The facts 3 Florinians Pty Ltd (Taverna) is a family business run by its directors, Ms Elli Parmaklis, Ms Domna Papavasiliou and Mr Yianni Parmaklis. The …

Read More

Another case considering t-shirt branding. Has Silberquelle been transplanted into Australian law?

The Australian airline Qantas has had its opposition against the “t-shirt” mark below rejected by the Federal Court (Qantas Airways Limited v Edwards [2016] FCA 729). (Edwards’ Mark) The decision makes interesting reading in a number of respects, but this note only considers a discreet issue. Is use on a t-shirt trade mark use? If so, in respect of what …

Read More

Page 1 of 10412345»102030...Last »