Selected microblog posts from the past week: Holman’s review David Koepsell – Who Owns You? The Corporate Gold Rush to Patent Your Genes http://ff.im/-7dK4P Patent Docs: Falsehoods, Distortions and Outright Lies in the Gene Patenting Debate http://ff.im/-7dK9H Koepsell fights back http://ff.im/-7dKek David Koepsell Doesn’t Know How to Cut His Losseshttp://ff.im/-7dKbE Patently-O: BRCA Gene Patents http://ff.im/-7mFuc Wyeth gets interloc. injunction in Australia against Alphapharm for alleged infringement of Efexor-XR patent:http://bit.ly/dvYwy Kenny J also rejects a higher threshold for.. Read More
Lundbeck had a patent for citalopram for the treatment of depression, which it marketed in Australia under the name Cipramil Citalopram is a chiral molecule: it can exist in two isomeric forms; a (+)-enantiomer and a (-)-enantiomer. The two forms have the same chemical structure, but they are mirror images. At its priority date, the relevant skilled addressees would have understood that the compound was a racemate or racemic mix consisting of both.. Read More
ACIP’s interim report on Post-Grant Patent Enforcement Strategies is now available on the internet (pdf). The main recommendation is that: Proposal 1: That IP Australia establish an IP dispute resolution centre along the lines of WIPO’s Arbitration and Mediation Center, which in the first instance focuses on patent disputes. Funding for the centre should be on a “user pays” basis. A number of “implementation” recommendations hang off that. For example: Proposal 2: That.. Read More
RT @pofip: ACCC warns about questionable trade mark renewals http://bit.ly/4l8aO1 Our list is here:http://bit.ly/hnznh @nipper: Podcast debate on SCOTUS granting cert in Bilski (patent) case: http://bit.ly/1c4oaw wrothnie ACIP interim report on post grant patent enforcement strategies. Comments by 20 Sep 2009. 4 copy contact Jackie Carroll http://bit.ly/IoZcZ RT @TrademarkBlog: Link to text of Superman Decision: Creator’s Heirs Win Rights to Early Storieshttp://bit.ly/fTO00 wrothnie Seminar: 27 August 2009: Copyright Responsibility on the Internet – in Three Acts — Copyright.. Read More
Having secured an International Registration, Guylain tried to register a chocolate in this shape as a trade mark in Australia through the Madrid Protocol (TM App 936483). Sundberg J, on appeal from the Registrar’s refusal, has also rejected it as incapable of distinguishing Guylain’s goods (pralines and chocolate, to be precise) under s 41. Not inherently adapted — enough First, Sundberg J was satisfied that the sea-horse shaped chocolate was inherently adapted to.. Read More
IP Australia has released two more discussion papers of reform proposals: Flexible search and examination Flexible Search and Examination (patents) Streamlining the patent process The Streamlining paper has some ambitious goals: Removing unnecessary differences in law between Australia and overseas jurisdictions. This would help reduce the cost to applicants of re-drafting claims to meet the various requirements of each jurisdiction. It would also reduce the potential for errors to occur as a result of the applicant.. Read More
Following in the footsteps of Marty Schwimmer and Dennis Kennedy, I shall try a weekly post aggregating selected IP “tweets”. If you’re keen on greater currency, my tweets also show up as they’re made in a side bar on the website. RT @priorsmart: RT @ernestgrumbles Is the Fed. Circuit pro-patent? Maybe Not http://bit.ly/Kd9gR (empirical study of decisions) RT @dhowell: RT @entlawupdate How the RealDVD ruling could reshape copyright law http://bit.ly/2sud8B RT @dhowell: Kaleidescape.. Read More
IP What’s Up (USA) reviews a book demystifying software licensing (from a US perspective). OUP’s link.
Plagiarism Today’s list of top 5 DMCA mistakes (and some things to do to avoid them).
Technicon has lost its appeal from trial findings that it infringed both Caroma’s registered design for a toilet pan and the copyright in drawings in technical specifications. This was a case under the old (1906) Act rules. The trial judge found there were sufficient differences to avoid liability for obvious imitation. However, there was a strong finding of fraudulent imitation. The trial judge found that Technicon at least had reason to believe or.. Read More