We know there are a lot of law students and graduates who read IP Whiteboard, so we thought we’d let you know that Mallesons has launched its first Facebook page for graduate careers at Mallesons!
Patent lawyers were kept busy throughout 2010, in a year which saw a company director being found liable for patent infringement, the Courts emphasising the importance of full and frank disclosure when seeking patent amendments, the first consideration of section 223 of the Patents Act, changes to patent prosecution practice, and legislative reform.
Amidst all the talk of increasing workforce participation and returning the budget to surplus in 2012-13, it’s perhaps unsurprising to find no big ticket items directly affecting IP in the 2011-12 Federal Budget handed on Tuesday night by Treasurer Wayne Swan.
Further to our earlier post in relation to the introduction of the Therapeutic Goods Legislation Amendment (Copyright) Bill 2011, the Bill has been passed unamended.
The Belgian Court of Appeal has recently upheld a 2007 decision that internet giant Google has infringed the copyright in news article snippets published on its Google News website.
Earlier this year, the Australian Patent Office (“APO”) in First Principles, Inc [2011] APO 1 considered the patentability of an invention relating to a method for “rational inquiry”.
It is trite law that, while the courts will review whether or not an artistic work has the requisite originality to be subject to copyright, they will not review its artistic merit.