Way more than an everyday interest in IP
On 21 September 2009, the Advisory Council on Intellectual Property (“ACIP”) released an options paper on patentable subject matter.
‘Manner of manufacture’ test
The paper analyses and discuses the value of the ‘manner of manufacture’ test currently used in determining whether an invention is patentable. ACIP is seeking comments on the following four options:
On 18 September 2009, the Treasurer and Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research released a consultation paper on the new research and development tax incentive. The incentive, announced as part of the 2009-2010 Budget, represents a significant change to the taxation of R&D expenditure in Australia.
The Federal Court of Australia has reminded us that an independent contractor commissioned to develop software may be taken to have agreed to assign equitable ownership of copyright in the software.
The case is Intelmail Australia v Vardanian [2009] FCA 1018. Justice Moore reviewed the principles to be applied when implying terms into an oral contract, confirming the following:
When one thinks about ISP liability, the focus is usually on copyright law and the extent of safe harbours provided under the relevant copyright regime, but the US$32 million damages verdict in the Louis Vuitton v Akanoc case shows that, at least in the United States, trade mark law is becoming increasingly important as well.
On 11 November 2008, the USPTO granted trade mark protection (registration no. 3531683) to Alyssa LaRoche for her Second Life avatar, Aimee Eber. The trade mark was granted for use in ‘[c]omputer programming services, namely, content creation for virtual worlds and three dimensional platforms’.
If you responded: ‘McCurry’ then you are in full agreement with the owners of that business. Apparently, the proprietors preferred McCurry, which is meant to be short for Malaysian Chicken Curry Restaurant… McDonalds, by contrast, considered that the use of “Mc” was likely to cause confusion by evoking “McDonalds” in the mind of consumers. This week, after pursuing its claim for eight years in Malaysia, McDonalds failed in its final attempt to overturn an earlier, adverse decision.
One might think that Google’s minimalist home page is among the most commonplace of designs. Apparently not. On 2 September, Google obtained a US design patent for the company’s iconic home page, on the basis that it is an innovative “graphical user interface”. Google’s design patent, as distinct from an invention patent, is equivalent to a registered design in Australia under the Designs Act 2003.
Uncertainty has arisen in the podcasting arena after VoloMedia, Inc, a company based in Sunnyvale, California, announced that it had been granted the “US Patent for Podcasting” at the end of July this year.
In the days following the announcement, two key questions emerged: can this patent be valid, and if so, how does VoloMedia intend to assert its newly acquired patent rights?