Category Archive for: ‘Patents’

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:

Productivity Commission recommends extensive changes to Australian IP – including fair use, circumventing geoblocks, abolishing business method and software patents and more!

Today, the Productivity Commission has released its draft report into Australia’s intellectual property arrangements. IP Whiteboard readers may recall that last year, the Federal Government asked the Productivity Commission to undertake a comprehensive review of Australia’s intellectual property system (see our previous post here). At 600 pages, the draft report is certainly comprehensive! We have published an alert summarising the …

Read More
Partner:

Computer implemented business methods – routine patent cases for the Australian courts?

A Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia appeared to suggest that patent cases involving claimed inventions for computer implemented business methods can be determined using an established framework and such cases are no longer at the cutting edge of patentability – that mantle has been assumed by gene technology. The case in point is Commissioner of Patents v …

Read More
Subjects:

Productivity Commission releases roadmap for IP review and calls for submissions

Last week, the Productivity Commission released the Issues Paper in accordance with its comprehensive review of Australia’s IP regime (Inquiry). In a previous post, we outlined the scope of the Inquiry and the key areas of the IP regime which the Federal Government had directed the Commission to examine and report on by August 2016. The Issues Paper sets out …

Read More
Partner:

The Trans-Pacific Partnership’s IP provisions: Biologics and biosimilars, copyright and privacy

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was concluded on 5 October 2015, after 8 years of negotiations. Its twelve signatories, who together account for 40% of world GDP, are Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States and Vietnam. The details of the agreement have yet to be released, but a number of drafts of the agreement …

Read More
Subjects: |

High Court re-invents the test for patentable subject matter and finds the patent for the isolated breast cancer gene invalid

The High Court has handed down a significant decision finding that patent claims for isolated gene sequences, indicative of a predisposition to breast cancer, are not patentable subject matter. The decision can be found here (a one page summary has also been published by the High Court). The decision overturns the unanimous decision of the Full Federal Court (which sat …

Read More
Subjects:
Partner:

High Court States the Obvious: AstraZeneca AB v Apotex Pty Ltd Appeal Decided

by Kim O’Connell, Suzy Madar and James Ellsmore In a widely anticipated decision, the High Court has upheld a decision of the Full Federal Court that AstraZeneca’s patent relating to low dosages of rosuvastatin is invalid for want of inventive step. Rosuvastatin is used in the treatment of high cholesterol and is marketed by AstraZeneca as Crestor. The decision will …

Read More
Subjects: |

Page 2 of 27«12345»1020...Last »