IP Australia has released three further consultation papers which discuss proposals for improving opposition proceedings and divisional application processes. The objective of the proposals is to reduce the period of uncertainty during which the public and third parties do not know where they have freedom to operate.

IP Australia invites any interested parties to make a written submission. Submissions should be made by 17 August 2009.

The three papers are:

Resolving Divisional Applications Faster

Resolving Patent Opposition Proceedings Faster

Resolving Trade Marks Opposition Proceedings

In IceTV Pty Limited v Nine Network Australia Pty Limited [2009] HCA 14, the High Court has decided that IceTV’s use of some of Nine Network’s time and title information obtained from aggregated program guides did not infringe Nine’s copyright in its weekly schedules. The High Court restored the trial judge’s original decision (see here and here).

The reforms aim to:

• reduce barriers in the innovation landscape for researchers and inventors;
• improve certainty about the validity of granted patents; and
• allow patent claims to be resolved faster.

Two discussion papers have been issued:

• ‘Getting the Balance Right’ – Raising patentability standards and giving greater certainty in the validity of granted patents
• ‘Exemptions to Patent Infringement’ – Ensuring that patents do not inhibit research and development in Australia

IP Australia invites any interested parties to make written submissions by 8 May 2009.

The scheme is expected to be in place by 1 July 2009. Under this right, visual artists will have a right to receive a share of sales of their artistic works on the secondary market for all works of art acquired after the legislation comes into effect over a threshold of $1000 at a rate of 5 percent.

The Bill has been referred to the Standing Committee on Climate Change, Water, Environment and the Arts for an advisory report by 20 February 2009.

There was no dispute that the similarities between the products could relevantly mislead or deceive for the purposes of the Trade Practices Act and the tort of passing off but the trial judge decided that Hansen failed to prove that as at the date when the conduct commenced, that it had the requisite reputation in the name or goods in Australia. Hansen's product was sold in USA but not trademarked in Australia.

The Full Court decided that the issue of reputation should be remitted to the primary Judge for reconsideration as he had erred in law by referring to the issue of a target market.

IP Australia considers that the maximum penalties for indictable offences should be raised to the same level as in the Copyright Act primarily because of the Commonwealth policy of consistency of penalty levels between similar offences.

IP Australia is seeking written comments by 27 February 2009.

So Connie Moore’s post on telepresence (the technology) and her first use of it is an encouraging sign.

Cyber Storm II was held in March in conjunction with the US Department of Homeland Security National Cyber Security Division, the UK’s Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure, Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada and New Zealand’s Centre for Critical Infrastructure Protection.

Its key finding was that "Effective response is enhanced by routinely reviewing and testing Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), Incident Response Plans and/or crisis management arrangements."

The review features a range of law blogs discussing the economy, society, politics, technology and education.

Most interesting was the post on the shrink-wrap licence surrounding a packet of grapes! Read it here.