IP Update September 2013 Issue 21
IP rights owners must be careful how they behave, is the lesson from two of our Case Studies.Asserting infringement of an invalid patent constitutes an unjustifiable threat, says theDSI case. Waiting 25 years before suing fortrade mark infringement may mean the infringer can’t be restrained, showsWinnebago.
It’s not just IP rights owners who need be aware of their actions. Failing to obey an interlocutory restraining orderis contempt of court (Connect TV), and a prior mischievoustrade mark applicationmay help prove alater application is invalid (Scott Ford).
Our other Case Studies explore what is a pharmaceutical substance (Spirit Pharmaceuticals), and how patent anticipation is judged hypothetically (Novozymes).
Our Practice Updates give you 5 tips on seekingan extension of time in patent oppositions, tell you how the NZ Patent Bill will affect software, and compare the US and Australian positions on the patentability of DNA sequences.
Finally, if you are unsure about what is the point of the patent system, then see our Insight.
In this issue
- Garford’s threat of patent infringement proceedings was unjustified against DSI
- Penalties for continued infringement of copyright: fines and imprisonment
- IP Australia provides guidance on extensions of time for patent oppositions
- New NZ Patents Act: How will it affect software patents in NZ?
- US Supreme Court rules Myriad’s BRCA genes not patentable: US vs Australian perspectives