August 2008

IceTV in the High Court

Copyright / / /

The High Court has apparently granted special leave to appeal.  

Lid dip, Kim (who also has a link to David Lindsay‘s slides).

It can’t just be the “what is worth copying is worth protecting” rubric that requires reconsideration so maybe House of Commons is on to something with the injunction (presumably to database owners) to be afraid?  The transcripts seem to be running about 2 weeks behind. 

IPwars on the Full Court decision.  IPKat reviews Estelle Derclaye’s new text on sui generis database protection.

IceTV in the High Court Read More »

Is it a trade mark?

Leave a Comment / Enforcement, Trade marks / /

Sydney 2000?

Athens 2004?

World Cup 2006?

Beijing 2008?

According to OHIM’s Board of Appeal, World Cup 2006 and related labels like Germany 2006 are descriptive and lack distinctive character.  Accordingly, it ordered their registration as trade marks cancelled.  IPKat has more details here.

May be Parliament was on to something when it enacted the Olympic Insignia Protection Act 1987.

Imagine what would happen if someone did something like this to AFL Grand Final or Formula 1 Grand Prix?

Is it a trade mark? Read More »

ACTA DownUnder

Leave a Comment / Enforcement, Trade / /

It seems DFAT has been considering ACTA since December 2007.

An overview here and here.

Now, DFAT has called for submissions and has flagged these as interesting topics.

Lid dip, Cheng Lim.

Meanwhile, IPKat reports of a UK Intellectual Property Office consultation paper on penalties for copyright infringement.

IPKat also draws attention to some further EU perspective on counterfeiting here (scroll down to 7.2).

ACTA DownUnder Read More »

Suspending a trade mark opposition

Leave a Comment / Trade marks / / / , , ,

On application by Darrell Lea, the Registrar suspended Darrell Lea’s oppositions to the registration of some purple trade mark applications by Cadbury purportedly pursuant to reg. 5.16.

Finkelstein J has now found that the Registrar does not have power to suspend oppositions indefinitely.

Given my involvement in matters purple, let me just refer you to Nicholas Weston’s consideration.

Darrell Lea Chocolate Shops Pty Ltd v Cadbury Limited [2008] ATMO 6 (15 January 2008)

Cadbury UK Ltd v Registrar of Trade Marks [2008] FCA 1126 (1 August 2008)

Suspending a trade mark opposition Read More »

The sky is falling

Leave a Comment / Copyright / / / , , ,

with apologies to Chief Vitalstatistix:

ARIA’s half year figures for 2008 show that sales of recorded music are still falling – down 4% on the corresponding period last year.

But guess what, the decline in sales of physical copies is almost all set off by the rise in digital sales: 12 million digital tracks up from 8 million for the 6 month period last year.  

According to ARIA:

“… figures which demonstrate the beginning of a remarkable transition to a whole new economy that is still only in its infancy.”

Perhaps in a sign of gloom for music industry executives, a lot of these downloads were single tracks rather than albums, but digital albums still increased by 55%.

ARIA press release here; full stats here.

The sky is falling Read More »

Upgrading

Leave a Comment / Because I felt like it / /

You may have noticed that IPwars has been more than usually missing.

This is mainly because the software for IPwars has become obsolete and I am attempting (so far, rather unsuccessfully) to transition to new software.

Please bear with me while this gets sorted out.

Upgrading Read More »

Patentable subject matter

Leave a Comment / Patents / /

A ‘manner of manufacture’ is something ‘more’ than a mere discovery or principle: it must be some thing or practical means of applying that principle in a field of economic endeavour (qua NRDC at e.g. [15] and [22]) and now, apparently, we have an example of a discovery or principle which was not patentable as being too abstract rather than a practical application …

I am not sure if what was discovered (at long last?) was the neutrino atom or the new science of the wonderfully named subtronics or pace claims 2 and 3 “a[ny] practical application of the newly discovered laws of electrical induction …”

IPKat has the run down here; the full application can be found here (enter 2003208113 into the application field but you might have to read and click the disclaimer here) and DC Spann’s decision here.

ACIP inquiry into Patentable Subject Matter still here.

Patentable subject matter Read More »

Scroll to Top