Sky News has taken its fight with Isentia to the Full Federal Court, after a judge found the the media monitor was not liable for copyright infringement despite the “wholesale copying” of content distributed to government clients.
The litigation funder that bankrolled a patent infringement case by a vehicle monitoring systems manufacturer is on the hook for legal costs after technology company SARB succeeded in appealing a finding that it infringed the IP for a parking detection system used by the City of Melbourne.Â
A judge has ruled that media monitor Isentia did not infringe the copyright of Sky News, despite the âwholesale copyingâ of content for its government clients, because its actions were done for the âservices of the Commonwealth or Stateâ.
Electronic payment solutions company BPAY has filed a lawsuit accusing crypto platform owner Be Pay Australia of infringing its BPAY trade mark.
A judge has ruled gaming giant Aristocrat Technologies cannot patent its Lightning Link electronic poker machine, after six High Court Justices split on whether the popular game was eligible for patent protection.
Hungry Jackâs is seeking five years of Big Mac sales data as it readies for a fight over damages stemming from its claim that its Big Jack burger has 25 per cent more beef than the McDonald’s burger.
Online marketplace Redbubble has succeeded on appeal in cutting down the damages it owes to Hells Angels from over $78,000 to just $100, following a finding that it violated the motorcycle groupâs trade marks.
Appealing her loss in a trade mark stoush with an Australian fashion designer, pop star Katy Perry has argued the woman âshould have changed directionâ with her âKatie Perryâ brand once the singer’s star began to rise.Â
The maker of Finish dishwashing products, RB Hygiene, has won a partial appeal in a trade mark stoush with rival Henkel, with the Full Court reviving two of its trade marks but rejecting its challenge to a logo for competing Somat-branded products.
Technology company SARB has partially succeeded in a challenge to a ruling that it infringed a rival’s intellectual property in its development of a parking system used by the City of Melbourne, with an appeals court finding a judge made an error in his reading of the claims of one patent at issue.