Category Archive for: ‘Subjects’
Trouble in paradise! The ‘Bula’ debate and the importance of cultural sensitivity in registering trade marks
The word ‘Bula’ translates to ‘life’. When used as a greeting by the people of Fiji, bula signifies wishes for longevity and good health. ‘Bula’ is commonly heard in Fiji, and is usually coupled with the beaming smiles of friendly Fijian people. However, there were less smiles in September last year when news spread that Ross Kashtan, CEO of the …
Let’s get clinical: Federal Court of Australia examines representations about ‘clinical’ efficacy of over-the-counter deodorants
Whether certain implied representations as to the clinical efficacy of deodorant products amounted to misleading or deceptive conduct for the purposes of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) was examined by the Federal Court of Australia in its recent decision in Unilever Australia Ltd v Beiersdorf Australia Ltd  FCA 2076.
Justice Jagot has allowed a generic pharmaceutical company a 30% reduction to account for risks associated with the past hypothetical cash-flows which underlie the assessment of damages in the case. The decision is H Lundbeck A/S v Sandoz Pty Ltd  FCA 1797 and is the culmination of many years’ litigation concerning Lundbeck’s patent for the antidepressant escitalopram.
Manner of manufacture and software-based inventions: What does it mean for an invention to involve “an improvement in the computer”?
Whether inventions relating to the use of a computer are patentable according to the ‘manner of manufacture’ test has for many years been unclear in Australia. This uncertainty, together with inconsistencies in how the law has been applied by the courts and the Australian Patent Office (APO), were just some of the contentious issues recently considered by a full bench of five judges from the Federal Court in Encompass Corporation Pty Ltd v InfoTrack Pty Ltd (NSD 734/2018)
Last year, Bayer was awarded more than $25 million (plus interest and indemnity costs) against Generic Health in the first Federal Court award of damages for pharmaceutical patent infringement. In the appeal by Generic Health, the Full Court of the Federal Court allowed Generic Health a 2% discount to the $25 million damages originally awarded. What made the FCFCA give Generic Health such a modest discount?
Remember Naruto, the monkey that took a selfie? Courts in the United States determined that human authorship was a requirement for copyright protection. So, if we can’t award monkey copyright, what about AI?
This recent Federal Court decision concerns two appeals by Trident Seafoods Corporation from decisions made by delegates of the Registrar of Trade Marks.
The Intellectual Property Owners Association’s 46th Annual Meeting took place in Chicago on 23-25 September 2018. Suzy Madar from the Sydney IP team reports on the conference highlights.
The interference action between the University of California (UC) and Broad Institute (Broad) has seemingly come to an end, with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Court (CAFC) affirming that the patent claims that had been granted to Broad in relation to its CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing patents are separately patentable from the claims of a patent application made by UC.