The funder backing a patent lawsuit by tech firm Vehicle Management Systems over an invention used by the City of Melbourne to time parked vehicles has been granted extended access to discovered documents in the proceedings.
A group of IP lawyers has warned the Government will have to proceed carefully in establishing a mandatory code under which Google and Facebook would be forced to pay news publishers for content, saying such a move could be struck down under existing High Court precedent.
Cheese maker Saputo’s proposed trade mark for an adorable cheese cartoon figure is substantially identical to Bega’s intellectual property for a ‘smiling anthropomorphised’ cheese biped and cannot be trade marked, a delegate of the trade marks office has found.
Animal health company Abbey Laboratories has successfully challenged an application by rival Bayer Australia for a patent covering a treatment for biting lice.
A Sydney burger chain that was ordered to change its name after losing a trade mark lawsuit by popular American burger franchise In-N-Out has lost its request to stay the ruling, with a judge finding the company had “greatly exaggerated” the costs of the name switch, which she called “a new marketing opportunity”.
Victoria Beckham has dropped a lawsuit seeking to block Sydney-based skincare company VB Skinlab from registering two VB trade marks, which the fashion designer and former Spice Girl claimed sought to trade off the reputation of her VB marks.
Gaming giant Aristocrat Technologies has succeeded in its appeal of an IP Australia decision rejecting four of its gaming patents, with a judge finding they were “not a mere scheme” but an actual manner of manufacture.
A trade mark infringement lawsuit filed by the former CEO of the Australian Bar Association was not properly brought as a class action on behalf of member barristers, a judge has found.
Australian bookmaker Sportsbet has filed a lawsuit against betting competitor Sportsbetting.com.au for alleged trade mark infringement and consumer law violations.
In its recent decision, the Federal Court has confirmed that schemes are not patentable merely because they are “new and ingenious” and are implemented using a computer. While the door is not completely closed on computer implemented schemes, the patentability threshold will never be passed unless there is some innovation in the computer technology, says Jane Owen and Rebecca Currey of Bird & Bird.