Copyright in bikini designs

Dodds-Streeton J has ordered that City Beach[1] pay Seafolly $250,333.06 by way of damages for infringing copyright in 3 Seafolly designs, including consideration of the copyright/design overlap

Designs Act 2003 review

ACIP has published an issues paper reviewing the operation of the Designs Act 2003 for the first time since it came into force.

A lamp lens too far

The fifth decision under the “new” Designs Act 2004 illustrates the operation of that old principle: in a crowded field, small differences may be enough to confer validity, but equally small differences in the accused products will be sufficient to avoid liability. You will recall that LED Technologies successfully sued Elecspess (and others) for infringing […]

Apple v Samsung

Nilay Patel at Thisismynext.com has embarked on an in depth examination of Apple’s new court action against Samsung. Unlike the spectacularly unsuccessful war against Windows (based on copyright and ‘look and feel’), this action involves: * patents; * design patents; and * trade dress. The “thing that distinguishes this case from Apple’s other actions against […]

2003 Designs Act appeal

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 […]

Who can enforce a release

Global Brands is still suing YD Pty Ltd. The trial on quantum for infringement of registered design was almost due to start when YD applied to amend. After YD admitted it had infringed Global Brands’ registered design, YD discovered, over 9 months earlier, that Global Brands had entered into a settlement agreement with Pegasus/Coastal relating […]

Down the proverbial Technicon

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 […]

Review cases handed down

On Friday, Kenny J handed down the 2nd and 3rd substantive design cases under the new Act: in Review v Redberry [2008] FCA 1588, her Honour found the design valid but not infringed; in Review v New Cover [20089] FCA 1589; valid and infringed including $85,000 damages (of which $50,000 were for additional damages). The judgments will […]