Category Archive for: ‘Copyright’
On 22 April 2009 the High Court delivered its decision in Ice TV Pty Ltd v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd.
The Australian parody/satire fair dealing defence to copyright infringement was introduced in December 2006 (s 41A of the Copyright Act ). But does anyone really know what it covers? Humour is subjective, and there is a dearth of relevant case law in this country. Of course, the parody/satire defence doesn’t require a piece to be funny per se (although such a requirement could lead to interesting courtroom debates), and the nature of parody implies that the piece must at least be comedic in nature.
The Government has announced a restructure of the Federal Courts system, which will expand the Federal Court’s IP jurisdiction.
The Federal Magistrates’ Court will be merged into the Federal Court and the Family Court, so that all IP disputes will be heard at first instance in the Federal Court. The new Federal Court will have two tiers:
Between July 2005 and May 2006, The Pirate Bay website provided a filesharing service utilising the BitTorrent file transfer protocol. This protocol involves dividing a principal file (eg a MP3 music file) into segments, which can be identified and accessed by locating small “torrent” files containing metadata about the file to be shared and the computer distributing it.
Taking steps to protect your invention could seem like a hassle when you’re buzzing with excitement and want to tell the whole world about your great new idea. But it’s worth taking a moment to stop and consider how to best protect your invention, as this cautionary tale demonstrates.
Irish internet provider Eircom has agreed to implement a “three strikes” notice and disconnect regime in settling a case brought against it in the High Court in Ireland by the Irish Recorded Music Association (IRMA).
On 16 December 2008 the UK Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills launched an informal consultation on the future direction of copyright. The aim of the consultation is to build on the Gower’s Report released in 2006 and ensure that the copyright system properly supports creative industries in the UK in the light of digital developments over the last decade.
The duty of a trial judge to give adequate reasons was at the heart of a recent appeal before the Full Federal Court brought by Carlisle Homes Pty Ltd. Carlisle, who we are acting for, was sued by Barrett Property Group Pty Ltd (Porter Davis Homes) for allegedly infringing copyright in Barrett plans such as “the Seattle”. Barrett has sued several industry players for infringing copyright in the ‘al fresco quadrant’ component of this plan (an open plan area plus courtyard under a single roofline). Carlisle lost at first instance and appealed the decision.
Mallesons’ Melbourne Intellectual Property team recently acted for Telstra in its successful application to intervene in the High Court appeal between Channel 9 and Ice TV. As an articled clerk in the Intellectual Property team, I attended court (sitting in Canberra) and assisted with Telstra’s preparation (for all the fun and excitement that was had, click here and here.