Yates J has ordered the respondents pay a 1% royalty for passing off their RVs as Winnebago’s
Tonnex was found to have infringed Dynamic’s copyright in its printer cartridge compatability chart. That finding was upheld on appeal. Now, Yates J has ordered Tonnex to pay Dynamic $150,001.00 in damages. The damages are comprised of compensatory damages under s115(2) of $1.00 and $150,000 by way of additional damages under s115(4).
Perram J has awarded $10 nominal damages for trade mark infringement against each of Scadilone, White Heaven and Quality Kebabs, but $91,015 additional damages against Quality Kebabs.
A registered trade mark does not always trump passing off or a claim for contravention of the Australian Consumer Law.
3 stripes v 4 stripes: the remedies – Robertson J has ordered a narrow injunction and reduced costs to 30% after finding 3 of 12 shoe styles infringed
The Full Court has upheld Insight SRC’s appeal that it was entitled to compensatory damages under s 115(2) of the Copyright Act. When ACER committed the infringements by reproducing the SOHQ, Dr Hart, the owner of the copyright, exploited it through his Insight company as an informal licensee or licensee at will. As is probably not uncommon with “family” companies, the terms of the licence were so unclear Besanko J.. Read More
Various members of Schapelle Corby‘s family, like most other people who take photographs, do own copyright in the photographs they have taken and Allen & Unwin, which published 5 of their photographs in The Sins of the Father, has to pay damages for the unauthorised use of those copyrights. Buchanan J awarded: between $500 and $5,000 compensatory damages pursuant to s 115(2) for each photograph; and $45,000 by way of additional damages.. Read More
Besanko J has awarded Insight SRC $32,510.00 for the infringements of its copyright in the School Organisational Health Questionnaire by the Australian Council for Educational Reseaarch (ACER). The award consisted of $10 nominal damages and $32,500 by way of additional damages. There are some interesting points about ownership, assignment and damages. The questionnaire consisted of 57 questions arranged under 12 headings or modules. ACER reproduced some 25 of these questions.. Read More
Over at the Fortnightly Review, Ass. Pro. David Brennan takes issue with the economists who argued that Larrikin should not have been paid any damages for the Kookaburra infringements. The economists’ argument seems to have been that Larrikin didn’t lose any sales as a result of Men at Works’ infringements and so suffered no loss. Damages under s 115(2) of the Copyright Act are compensatory: that is, they are calculated.. Read More
The Full Federal Court (Emmett, Besanko and Jessup J) has dismissed Elecspess’ appeal from Gordon J’s ruling that it had infringed LED Technologies’ registered design for combination LED lights used as rear lights for trailers, trucks, buses, caravans and other vehicles. I think this is the first substantive decision by a Full Court on the new regime introduced by the Designs Act 2003. From a very quick skim, it seems.. Read More