1,149 results found

The Hashtag Burgers directors were liable for trade mark infringement, passing off and misleading and deceptive conduct.

IP Australia has updated its Patent Manual following the High Court's decision in Aristocrat Technologies, providing clearer guidance on patentability of computer-implemented inventions. While the changes don't broadly expand patentability for software inventions, they establish a more structured framework for applicants to challenge narrow claim characterizations during examination, particularly in sectors like fintech, AI, and digital services.

Recent developments relating to a "Building Innovation" Report suggest that NZ is coming closer to a new patents regime.

Interesting case study on leading Australian company in the green & chemicals energy space.

The case is a caution to businesses and practitioners on vital considerations before opposing registration of a trademark.

The updated APO guidelines for patentability are also arguably counterproductive to encouraging innovation in Australia.

This article sets out the key regulatory considerations in Australia.

Article provides a snapshot of the licensing of SEPs in Australia & provides a description of a standard essential patent.

A withdrawn patent application can still form part of the prior art base in certain circumstances.

Summary of the recent changes to NZ Trade Mark law.

Rock and roll icons, Rolling Stones prevented trade mark registration of the Australian fashion label, JAGGER & STONE.

These changes are intended to simplify, clarify and bring greater certainty to users of the UK patent system.

The disclosure of all parent applications should be included in any subsequent divisional application to ensure priority.

The disclosure in parent and priority applications should be included in any subsequent applications to claim priority.

The Court introduced new and unexpected requirements for patentability of inventions in the information technology space.

The Full Court of the Federal Court has dismissed an appeal by Lockwood Security Products Pty Ltd (Lockwood) and has held that several claims in Lockwood’s Australian Patent No. 702534 (the Patent) were invalid for being obvious. In addition, the Full Court also held that Doric Products Pty Ltd (Doric) did not infringe those claims that covered the preferred embodiment of the invention described in the Patent.

The case shows a design element can change the impression conveyed, so the composite mark gave a different impression.