Cameron Harvey (AU)

Subscribe to all posts by Cameron Harvey (AU)

Who’s in control? Liability for copyright infringement by contractors and software developers

The High Court recently delivered its decision in Real Estate Tool Box v Campaigntrack 1 relating to copyright authorisation. The High Court held that the appellants, who had engaged a third party software developer to create a real estate marketing system for their use, were not liable for copyright infringement, as they had not authorised the developer’s infringement of Campaigntrack’s … Continue reading

NUMB: BOTOX reputation insufficient to stop PROTOX

Earlier this month, the High Court of Australia ultimately rejected trade mark infringement and misleading/deceptive conduct claims by Allergan (owner of the injectable BOTOX®) against Self Care’s anti-wrinkle skincare products PROTOX and INHIBOX (marketed under the slogan ‘instant Botox® alternative’). The case has been running for 6 years. Allergan relied on the overwhelming reputation of … Continue reading

Aristocrat Technologies: The Future Patentability of Gaming Technology and Computer-Implemented Inventions

Last month, the High Court dismissed an appeal by gaming technology provider Aristocrat Technologies over whether computerised components in their electronic gaming machines (EGMs) which triggered a “feature game” constituted patentable subject matter. The judgment was split evenly between the six justices. Although in theory the ruling should provide more clarity on the increasingly important … Continue reading

Clarity in advertising a must, says ACCC

On 12 December 2013 the High Court of Australia held TPG Internet Pty Ltd had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct when it ran certain advertisements between 2010 and 2011. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v TPG Internet Pty Ltd [2013] HCA 54. TPG’s advertisements for ADSL2+ “prominently displayed” a price for the service of … Continue reading

Brand owners continue to target parallel importers

A recent case brought by Electrolux in the Federal Court of Australia reflects the trend of brand owners targeting parallel imports of their goods into Australia. Electrolux Home Products Pty Ltd v Delap Impex Ltd [2013] FCA 600. The Federal Court strengthened the position of trade mark owners in this area in its decision in Paul’s Retail … Continue reading

Can foreign word marks be inherently adapted to distinguish? The tale of two coffee houses

Cantarella Bros. Pty Ltd has imported raw coffee beans into Australia since 1958. Once imported, Cantarella roasts, grinds and packages the coffee under the trade mark Vittoria. Cantarella registered the words ORO and CINQUE STELLE as trade marks with respect to coffee and coffee-related products in mid-to-late 2000 and uses them as set out below. … Continue reading