Aristocrat v Commissioner of Patents: Redefining Patentable Subject Matter in Australia
For more than a decade, Australian courts and IP Australia have struggled to develop a consistent and predictable test for assessing as to how the “manner of manufacture”…
The “Mark Within a Mark”: How Composite Branding Protects Your Core Trade Mark
The decision of the Federal Court of Australia in Trafalgar Group Pty Ltd v Boss Fire & Safety Pty Ltd concerns two interconnected trade mark disputes relating to a device…
What can or cannot be patented: A Comparative Analysis Globally
In today’s dynamic and competitive landscape of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), understanding what can or cannot be patented is essential for individuals, organizations, and…
Trade Mark Infringement and the risks of imitation masked as a “tribute”
The case of Hashtag Burgers Pty Ltd v In-N-Out Burgers, Inc [2020] FCAFC 235 is much more than a simple dispute over fast-food naming rights, i.e. it is a definitive lesson in the…
Animated Characters and the Limits of Trade Mark Infringement
The High Court of Australia’s decision in Shell Company of Australia Ltd v Esso Standard Oil (Australia) Ltd [1963] HCA 66 remains a landmark judgment in the domain of trade mark…
Branding, Collaborations and the limitations of using a Name
When two brands share a common name, the legal dispute often shifts to how consumers perceive that name within the context of the marketplace. The recent decision by Justice…
Enablement and Written Description: What Examiners Really Look for in Australian Patent Applications
Patents promote innovation by granting monopoly in exchange for disclosure of the invention. However, not every invention matures into a grantable or enforceable patent. Among the…
How to Build a Patent Portfolio for Licensing, Fundraising, or Exit Strategy
Innovation alone is not sufficient to secure commercial success in today’s global technology landscape. For product designers, engineers, and researchers, the real differentiator…
