Philips Ormonde Fitzpatrick logo
 
intellectual property    about us   our services   our professionals   news & publications   employment   contact us 
newsletter :: latest newsletter and form :: news :: lab notebook guide :: ip resources     search button
 
news and publications
:: news
small arrow case review - nz opposition by hansen beverage
small arrow case review - opposition by nz post
small arrow change at ipopng
small arrow latest newsletter available
small arrow case review - ranbaxy appeal
small arrow new interactive map
small arrow new ip blog
small arrow top tier results in mip survey copy
small arrow case review - health world v shin-sun australia
small arrow mip global awards
small arrow uspto practice
small arrow case review - review australia v innovative lifestyle investments
small arrow brw triathlon success
small arrow case review - polo/lauren
small arrow po&f rating well in surveys
small arrow key ip treaties - global snapshot
small arrow case review - chiropedic bedding pty ltd v radburg pty ltd
small arrow case review - granting a licence to harvest trees may amount to contributory infringement of a patent
small arrow change to search results requirement
small arrow case review - termite tite v term-seal
small arrow case review - brothervdynamic
small arrow to amend or not to amend; that is the question
small arrow government to provide for experimental use
small arrow vale tony price
small arrow promotions
small arrow next big thing award winner announced
small arrow lockwood wins high court case
small arrow case review - burge v swarbrick
small arrow po&f client, labtech systems ltd, signs worldwide license agreement
small arrow hat trick for po&f in brw st george client choice awards
small arrow top tier results in mip survey
small arrow ip australia fees to change
small arrow new brand for phillips ormonde & fitzpatrick
small arrow physical effect of business methods

 


Case review - Burge v Swarbrick - Phillips Ormonde & Fitzpatrick

Case review - Burge v Swarbrick




4 May 2007



On 26 April 2007 the High Court of Australia handed down its decision in the Burge v Swarbrick case setting aside a finding of copyright infringement made by the Full Federal Court.

The ultimate issue was whether the “plug” and “hull and deck mouldings” of the JS 9000 yacht designed by Swarbrick were “works of artistic craftsmanship”. As the problems overcome during the design of the yacht had been predominantly matters to do with function, requiring engineering skills rather than artistic effort, the High Court held that the “plug” and “hull and deck mouldings” were not “works of artistic craftsmanship” and therefore not afforded copyright protection.

The case emphasises the need to obtain appropriate protection for intellectual property and to not rely on copyright protection for industrially applied designs that are constrained by functional considerations. Design registration (or patent protection where relevant) is the more appropriate form of intellectual protection for such works.


High Court Judgement



 
copyright © Phillips Ormonde & Fitzpatrick 2006  I  Privacy Statement  I  Disclaimer  I  Sitemap Melbourne | Sydney | Adelaide | New Zealand
Komodo Content Management System. Link to website