IP | TheBrief

ip trademark patents

ANNOUNCEMENT - The Brief reached a milestone with readership across 50 countries since launching the Founding Collection

are pingers scandalous in australia?

When Pingers walked into the room (or more accurately, onto the Trade Marks Register), examiners at IP Australia immediately blushed. “Surely this is slang for MDMA, how scandalous!” But the Registrar wasn’t convinced. On 18 August 2025, the Delegate in Re Volstead Pty Ltd [2025] ATMO 164 decided that although Pingers for spirits was in bad taste, it was not scandalous under s 42(a) of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth). Australia’s scandal track record: Refusals and Acceptances

By Fabiola Dos Santos

Australia-European Union Free Trade Agreement and what this means for GI protection in Australia

Australia and the European Union concluded negotiations on a historic free trade agreement on 24 March 2026, following eight years of extensive negotiations. One of the key obstacles to the signing of the Australian and European Union Free Trade Agreement (AEUFTA) was the European Union’s insistence that Australia provide geographical indication (GI) protection to the names of agricultural products and spirits that have been recognised domestically. The compromise position re

By Megan Ryder

Pharmaceutical Patent Term Extensions in Australia

Patent term extensions (PTEs) in Australia sit at the centre of a long-running tension between innovation policy and statutory interpretation. Introduced to compensate pharmaceutical patentees for regulatory delay, the regime has increasingly been asked to do more than it was originally designed to achieve, particularly in relation to formulation and delivery system patents. The Full Federal Court’s decision in Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co Ltd v Sun Pharma ANZ Pty Ltd [2025] FCA

By Milena Dryza & Jeff Holman

Battle of the beckhams - parents right to trademark their child's name

Even those who typically pay little attention to celebrity gossip have likely learned of the feud between Brooklyn Beckham and his parents, Sir David and Lady Victoria Beckham. Back in January in an Instagram post, Brooklyn Beckham made it clear he had no interest in reconciling with his family. Brooklyn also made claims that his family has “repeatedly pressured and attempted to bribe me into signing away the rights to my name“. background The internet has been in a fury sinc

By Taryn Lovegrove & Madeleine Chan

Pharmaceutical patent preliminary injunction drought ends in Australia

For almost eight years, pharmaceutical originators faced an unbroken run of defeats when seeking preliminary injunctions (PIs) in the Federal Court of Australia. The prevailing judicial approach appeared to be that monetary damages were an adequate remedy for losses suffered by innovators arising from generic market entry, even where that entry later proved to be infringing. Against that backdrop, the recent grant of two PIs to originator companies is a significant and unexpe

By Dr Claire Gregg

Killer Queen - Katie vs katy, “assiduous infringer” reasoning

This introduction to the recent Killer Queen case is presented by The Brief editorial before an article by written by Craig Simth SC of List G Barristers. Introduction The legal findings around Australian designer Katie Taylor were more nuanced than a simple allegation of knowingly exploiting the fame of Katy Perry (the recording artist). Taylor had been using the name “Katie Perry” in connection with fashion before the dispute escalated publicly, and importantly, “Katie Per

By Craig Smith

AI and Automated Decision Making (ADM) in Australian ip

IP Australia’s Strategic Corporate Plan for 2025-2026 lists one of its Significant Initiatives as “Continue to innovate with AI and Automated Decision Making (ADM) tools in accordance with government requirements for their responsible use, enhancing our efficient and effective administration of the IP system.” Background IP Australia’s commitment to keeping up with technological advancements is crucial, as AI presents numerous implications for the current intellectual propert

By Hayley Tarr

Full Federal Court finds Aldi liable for copyright infringement in Little Bellies packaging case

Aldi has a well-documented history of producing “mirror products”, which adopt similar names and packaging to those of competitors as a core element of its private-label strategy. It has historically defended challenges to that strategy under the Australian Consumer Law and the tort of passing off with some success. The Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia’s decision in Aldi Foods Pty Ltd v Hampden Holdings I.P. Pty Ltd [2026] FCAFC 103 shifts the legal ground to copy

By Caitlin Meade, Fiona Brittain & Rebecca Dunn

Full Federal Court finds Aldi liable for copyright infringement in Little Bellies packaging case