IPwars.com

Mainly intellectual property (IP) issues Down Under

War

A barrister practising mainly in Australian patents, trade marks, copyright and other IP law; lecturer and contributing author to LexisNexis' Copyright & Designs and Patents looseleaf services

GSK’s extended release paracetamol patent 2

Apotex also lost its cross-appeals on fair basis and best method

WTO upholds Australia’s tobacco plain packaging laws

The Dispute Resolution Panel has rejected the complaints by Honduras, the Dominican Republic, Cuba and Indonesia against Australia’s tobacco plain packaging laws.

A Basket Is Still Not A Cylinder

Glaxo has lost its appeal against Beach J’s ruling that Apotex and Generic Partners did not infringe its sustained release paracetamol patent because the mistaken reference to “basket” could not be interpreted as “cylinder”.

PC Implementation 1 Bill To Be Passed

Senate Economics committee recommends passage of PC Implementation bill No 1

Service providers and safe harbours

A consultation on draft regulations has been released as the extension of online safe harbours to the education, cultural and disability sectors nears enactment

Staying arbitration: Kraft, Bega, Warner Bros and Mad Max

In the face of misleading and deceptive conduct litigation in Australia, O’Callaghan J has granted injunctions restraining Kraft from pursuing its arbitration claims in New York against Bega’s sale and promotion of Bega Peanut Butter in what Kraft alleges is misleading or deceptive get-up.

IP Laws Amendment ( Productivity Commission Response Pt 1 etc) Bill 2018

The Senate Economics Committee requires submissions on the (intellectual property) Productivity Commission Response Pt 1 bill to be submitted by 1 June 2018

Patent cases in the Federal Court

A statistical survey of patent litigation in the Federal Court of Australia

New Twist In Website Blocking Injunctions

Nicholas J has granted further injunctions under s 115A against the telcos / ISPs to block access to websites related to HD Subs+.

ESCO’s patent did not make a composite promise and so is not invalid afterall

ESCO has won its appeal from the ruling that its patent lacked utility because the claims did not fulfill all promised advantages. The Patent ESCO’s patent relates to a wear assembly for securing a wear member to excavating equipment. Think of it as a way of attaching “teeth” to an excavating bucket and for a design of the “teeth” themselves. There are 26 claims. Claim 1 (and its dependent claims)[1].. Read More

%d bloggers like this: