Logan J has ruled that documents prepared by a firm of trade mark attorneys in connection with a domain name arbitration are not covered by trade marks attorney privilege
The Full Court has accepted that an exclusive licensee can agree to acquire all its requirements of the licensed products from the patentee. A sub-licensee, however, is not an exclusive licensee.
According to the traditional view, recently applied by Rares J, there would be no infringement in Australia in the circumstances outlined.
Selected links from last week
A selection of the links I found interesting over the last couple of weeks
Here is a selection of links to IP-related matters I found interesting last week
In case you missed the: A selection of links I found interesting last week
In partly allowing Glaxo’s appeal, the Full Court (Allsop CJ, Yates and Robertson JJ) has ruled against an expansive interpretation of omnibus claims.
The Commerce Select committee of the NZ Parliament has recommended that NZ should continue with the proposed Single Application and Examination Processes for patent applications in both Australia and NZ. The committee, however, did support continuing with the single trans-Tasman patent attorney regime.
Beach J has ruled that there is no warrant for interpreting “basket” in GSK’s patent to mean “cylinder”, with the consequence that the patent was neither infringed, nor invalid.