-
Use of competitors trade marks for comparative advertising
Comparative advertising can be a powerful tool, but it must be done within the bounds of the law. Learn more about the legal implications of comparative advertising in Australia, including the case of GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Limited (No 2) [2018] FCA 1.
-
Trade mark infringement – the good faith defence
Navigating trade mark law can be difficult. This article explains the good faith defence and what circumstances must be fulfilled for it to be available, as well as relevant case law and further info.
-
Opposing a trade mark on the grounds of bad faith
Court found respondent infringed copyright of Dee Snider’s works, awarding AUD $1.5 million for flagrant, contumelious infringements. Not fair or satirical.
-
Case study – intellectual property protection structures
Protect your valuable intellectual property and secure revenue for product development. Learn how Dundas Lawyers can help you create an intellectual property protection structure with potential benefits for your business.
-
Calculating account of profits for trade mark infringement
This article examines the calculation of damages when an account of profits is awarded as a remedy for trade mark infringement. It covers the general principle, the proportionality rule, and the deduction of overhead costs.
-
Unjustified threats of trade mark infringement
Comprehensive list of Australian Court decisions and related legislation covering corporate, technology, intellectual property, commercial, employment, negligence, confidentiality, copyright, moral rights, user generated content, click wrap/browse wrap, trademarks, torts and social media law.
-
Can meta tags constitute trade mark infringement?
Find out how the case of Accor Australia & New Zealand Hospitality Pty Ltd v Liv Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 554 highlights the potential risk of trademark infringements to businesses. Read more to discover the case background, takeaways, and tips to protect your business.
-
Not so swole – removal of trade marks for non-use
The Federal Court examined the evidence needed to prove intention to use a trade mark in good faith. Find out what happened when an application for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal was refused.
-
Confusing marks – Sensis v Senses
Sensis Pty Ltd v Senses Direct Mail and Fulfillment Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 719: Court ruled SENSES marks deceptively similar to SENSIS marks, highlighting importance of engaging intellectual property lawyers when building a brand. Marks can be infringing if spelling is only slightly different, if it resembles another and likely to deceive and cause confusion.
Trademark infringement
Make an enquiry
