Unfortunately, it has become common for IP owners to receive unsolicited and ‘misleading invoices’ for office fees, services rendered or rights publication in various registers. More concerning fraudulent behaviour has come to light which deserves your urgent attention. 

The Trans-Tasman IP Attorneys Board (TTIPAB) has warned its members of a very concerning scam which has emerged involving the impersonation of registered IP attorneys to defraud IP rights owners. In this case, IP owners are receiving correspondence pressuring them into filing a trade mark via emails fraudulently purporting to be from a real attorney.

An opposition to the ANASTASIA MIARAY trade mark by the owner of the ANASTASIA BEVERLY HILLS trade mark was unsuccessful. Much of the decision hangs on the scope of the pleadings, and use of the single letter “a” instead of “b” in the notice of opposition.

The firm’s expertise and success, both collectively and individually, has been acknowledged throughout 2024, most recently with Henry Hughes Law named an Excellence Awardee in the New Zealand Law Awards Intellectual Property Specialist Law firm of the year.

In August the New Zealand High Court overturned the Assistant Commissioner’s decision not to revoke the trade mark FEEL ALIVE, emphasising the importance of evidence of genuine use of the trade mark and that the owner controlled and authorised the use of the trade mark. The High Court’s further decision on costs serves as a reminder that a successful appellant may not be awarded costs when the defendant does not participate in the appeal and advises that it will abide the Court’s decision.

As of October 1, 2024, substantial changes will be implemented regarding the costs awarded in patent, trade mark, and design rights proceedings. These adjustments reflect a significant increase in the amounts that can be claimed as costs following a hearing. With increasing stakes for both winning and losing parties, the dynamics of IP disputes are set to shift, influencing how parties approach their cases.

The New Zealand High Court has overturned a decision of the Commissioner of Patents not to allow an applicant to correct an omission, made by the applicant’s patent attorney, in not requesting postponement of acceptance of a New Zealand patent application. 

IPAustralia has just completed its four-yearly fee review, with changes to come into effect from 1 October 2024. While the majority of the changes are fairly straightforward and customary, a change to the way excess claim fees for patent applications are charged presents a new consideration for patent applicants and their advisors in Australia.

In the patent sphere, while the law on inventorship by non-human inventors is now largely settled, the UK High Court recently caused a stir by finding an invention which was heavily reliant on an artificial neural network (ANN), patentable. This note covers the appeal of that decision and its implications.