Category Archive for: ‘Patents’

Stuck between some wine and a hard case – some lessons from the Barokes “wine in a can” saga

Every now and then a case cracks open a delicious mix of intellectual property and commercial problems. Recent litigation by Barokes over “wine in a can” is one such example. After centuries of drinking wine out of glass bottles (or ‘goon sacks’ [1]) two inventors took the plunge and developed revolutionary technology for “wine in a can”. Barokes Pty Ltd (Barokes) …

Read More
Partner:

Threats Muddy Waters: unjustified threats of infringement in the Full Federal Court of Australia

A decision in March of the Full Federal Court in Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Coretell Pty Ltd [2017] FCAFC 44 concerning unjustified threats of infringement will have some lawyers as happy as pigs in mud. Dishing the Dirt Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd (AMC) is the owner of an innovation patent related to core sampling. In November 2006, it …

Read More

‘Essential’ telecom patents: How to win FRANDs and influence people

The UK High Court’s 150+ page epic on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) licence terms in Unwired Planet v Huawei has stirred up a lot of commentary in the tech nerd space and the international patent community (across which there is probably a fair bit of overlap). The decision goes some way to standardising the terms under which mobile phone …

Read More
Subjects: |

Off to a running start? Federal Court of Australia permits generic manufacturer to make PBS application before patent expiry

Can a manufacturer apply for Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) approval for a generic drug before the patent has expired? Justice Nicholas held in February in Apotex Pty Ltd v Warner-Lambert Company LLC (No 3) [2017] FCA 94 that the answer was “Yes”, and his Honour’s decision was recently affirmed by the Full Federal Court in Warner-Lambert Company LLC v Apotex …

Read More
Subjects: |

Big data, big risk – investing in a “largely theoretical” industry

Between 31 May 2012 and 26 March 2013, an Australian husband and wife (Mr and Ms Vinson), through their self-managed superannuation funds, invested $1,250,000 and $1,625,000 respectively in a company that never earned any operating revenue. The company, Semantic Software Asia Pacific Limited (formerly Tralee Technology Holdings Pty Ltd) (Semantic), was a software company looking to establish itself in the …

Read More
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:

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:

Full Court warns against dangerous affliction of parameteritis (and confirms invalidity of aripiprazole patent)

On Wednesday the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia handed down a decision in which it upheld Justice Yates’ findings that Otsuka’s patent relating to aripiprazole, a drug used in the treatment of schizophrenia, is invalid for want of novelty and inventive step.  Otsuka had alleged that Generic Health’s aripiprazole products, which were registered for the treatment of schizophrenia, …

Read More
Subjects:

Page 1 of 2712345»1020...Last »