Tuesday, June 23, 2015

Scintilla TV: Update on the Dallas Buyers Club case

The latest chapter in the significant Dallas Buyers Club Inv v iiNet case is currently playing out in the Federal Court.

The matter is now focused on the wording of the letter from Dallas Buyers Club Inc to those who illegally downloaded the movie in Australia.

Allens Senior Associate Jesse Gleeson gives us a video update on the latest manoeuvrings in the case.

Monday, June 22, 2015

Wild Turkey victorious in its quest to dominate the (alcoholic) wild bird world

By Nadia Guadagno, Senior Associate

The owners of Wild Turkey Bourbon* and Wild Geese Rare Irish Whisky (Lodestar) have been engaged in a 15-year worldwide battle regarding their respective rights to use the WILD GEESE mark. The owners of Wild Turkey have vigorously opposed use by the makers of Wild Geese Rare Irish Whiskey of the words ‘Wild Geese’. The underlying motivation? Apparently not everyone might distinguish a wild goose from a wild turkey.

Wednesday, June 17, 2015

Senate Committee recommends anti-piracy injunctions

By Jonathan Adamopoulos, Senior Associate

In a report released last week, the Senate's Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee has recommended that the Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Bill 2015 (Cth) be enacted into law. The report was released following a period of public consultation with key industry groups and other stakeholders.

Friday, June 12, 2015

Queensland's biodiscovery legislation under review

By Julieane Bull, Senior Associate

The Queensland Government is reviewing the Biodiscovery Act 2004 (Qld). Those who use genetic resources for commercial biodiscovery – such as biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, research institutions and venture capital/investment funds – should consider making a submission to the review before its closing date of midnight, 29 June 2015.

The terms of reference for the Act's review are broad, including the purposes, structure and effectiveness of the Act. Our previous Focus summarised the current regulatory framework for biodiscovery activities in Queensland. The review invites recommendations for amendments to the Act, or alternatives to legislation, which would improve the effectiveness, fairness, timeliness and accessibility of the regulatory system.

The battle for gold continues

By Nadia Guadagno, Senior Associate

The fight for the right to own ORO (which means 'gold' in Italian and Spanish) is on again – this time between biscuit and snack food companies in the EU.

You may recall that at the end of last year, the High Court ruled that Cantarella's mark ORO was inherently adapted to distinguish its coffee products from those of other traders in Australia. This was based on the finding that ORO does not convey a meaning or idea sufficiently tangible to anyone in Australia concerned with coffee products. (See our Scintilla blog for a summary of the High Court's decision in Cantarella v Modena).

The position, albeit in relation to biscuits, is the same in Europe.

Friday, May 29, 2015

House Rules Rule One: Don't copy someone else's plans

By Tracy Lu, Senior Associate

In the recent appeal decision of Tamawood Limited v Habitare Developments Pty Ltd (Administrators Appointed) (Receivers and Managers Appointed) [2015] FCAFC 65, the Full Federal Court found that a firm of architects had infringed the copyright in construction plans created by another company and also that the directors of the developer which had engaged the architects had authorised the infringement.

Under commercial circumstances which the primary judge described to be 'relatively casual', the applicant Tamawood and the developer Habitare entered discussions relating to the potential development of some 'low-cost, intensive housing projects' in Brisbane. Tamawood created plans for the projects for which it was not paid, but there was common expectation that Tamawood would be appointed as the builders of the projects.

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

Scintilla TV: The countdown is on for the Trans-Pacific Partnership

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a proposed multi-lateral trade agreement between 12 Pacific Rim nations, including Australia.

Reports last week indicated that the deal is close to being finalised after more than five years of negotiations. Speaking after those reports, Allens Partner Sarah Matheson discusses the progress of the deal, and how it may affect Australia's IP laws.

video