Copyright and Innovative Technologies

This article examines how the Australian legal system manages copyright issues related to the development of innovative technologies, focusing in particular on how the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) (CA) enforces the effect of ‘technological protection measures’ and ‘access control protection measures’ by proscribing the use of ‘circumvention devices’. Cases referred to are Autodesk v Dyason [1992] HCA 2 and Stevens v Kabushiki Kaisha Sony Computer Entertainment & Ors [2005] HCA 58. Legislation discussed is the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), Copyright Amendment (Digital Agenda) Act 2000 (Cth), Copyright Amendment Act 2006 (Cth). Reference is also made to the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement

Real Estate Agents' Liability for Negligent Misstatement

During the process of selling or leasing a property, a real estate agent may make statements about the property which later turn out to be false (incorrect). This article examines the liability of real estate agents in the tort of negligence for the making of false statements. Cases discussed are Shaddock & Associates Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council (1980-1981) 150 CLR 225, Norris v Sibberas (1989) Aust. Torts Reports 80-288, Richard Ellis (W.A.) Pty Ltd v Mullins Investments Pty Ltd (in liq) (1995) Aust Torts Reports 81-309 and Rawlinson & Brown Pty Ltd v Witham (1995) Aust Torts Reports 81-341

Protection of Confidential Information in the Engineering Industry

This article explains how confidential information in the engineering industry can be protected by the common law action of breach of confidence and by confidentiality (secrecy) clauses in contract law. First the article discusses breach of confidence, examining cases such as Saltman Engineering Co Ltd v Campbell Engineering Co Ltd (1948) 65 RPC 203 and Surveys & Mining Ltd v Morrison [1967] VR 37. Then it discusses confidentiality clauses in contracts, and considers the nullifying effect of the doctrine of restraint of trade, looking at recent decisions such as Maggbury v Hafele (2001) 210 CLR 181 and AIM Maintenance v Brunt [2004] WASC 49

Alcohol advertising and youth drinking in Australia -- what are the available complaints mechanisms, legal and otherwise?

Youth drinking is regarded as a major social problem in Australia. This paper examines the regulations presently in place, legal or otherwise, relating to the advertising of alcohol beverages in Australia, focusing on the complaints mechanisms available to those who are concerned that these alcohol advertisements have the potential to promote under-age drinking and binge drinking in young people. The paper discusses the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (Cth), the role of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, Australian Communications and Media Authority, Australian Press Council, and advertising self-regulation through the Advertising Standards Bureau and the Alcohol Beverages Advertising Code

Character Merchandising and the Sporting Industry

This article examines issues related to the marketing strategy of "character merchandising", or the endorsement of products or services by famous people. The unauthorised use of a person's character may be prevented by the tort of passing off and an action under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). Cases discussed are Henderson v Radio Corp, Hogan v Koala Dundee Pty Ltd, Hogan v Pacific Dunlop Limited,Pacific Dunlop Limited v Hogan, Honey v Australian Airlines, Hutchence v South Sea Bubble Company, and Talmax Pty Ltd v Telstra Corp Ltd

Liability for Negligent Misrepresentation in the Finance Industry

Sometimes statements made by people working in the finance industry when giving advice may be incorrect. This article examines how the tort of negligence applies to the making of these misrepresentations. Cases discussed include Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465, Mutual Life & Citizens Assurance Co Ltd v Evatt (1968) 122 CLR 556, Shaddock & Associates Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council (1980-1981) 150 CLR 225, Tepko Pty Ltd v Water Board (2001) 206 CLR 1, Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] 2 AC 605 and Esanda Finance Corporation Ltd v Peat Marwick Hungerfords (1997) 188 CLR 241

Patents and the Agricultural Industry

This article gives a brief overview of the patent regime in Australia, with particular emphasis on its relevance to the agricultural industry. The article begins with a background to the patent regime in Australia. It then examines ownership, validity, exceptions to patentability, the application process, the specification and revocation. Relevant provisions of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) are examined as necessary, as are relevant regulations in the Patents Regulations 1991 (Cth). Cases discussed include National Research Development Corp v Commissioner of Patents (1959) 102 CLR 252 and Van der Lely NV v Bamfords Ltd [1963] RPC 61

Do we need a sign on every rock in the water? Standard of care in negligence and the Tourism Industry in Western Australia

If a tourist is accidentally injured while visiting Western Australia, he or she may seek damages in the tort of negligence. The Civil Liability Act 2002 (WA) (CLA 2002), based on the Ipp Report, has altered the legal position with respect to such claims. This article examines the CLA 2002, and offers the tourism industry in Western Australia some insight into the effect of the Act. The Occupiers' Liability Act 1985 (WA) is also discussed. Cases referred to include Australian Safeway Stores v Zaluzna (1987) 162 CLR 479, Wyong Shire Council v Shirt(1980) 146 CLR 40 and Nagle v Rottnest Island Authority (1993) 177 CLR 423

Occupiers' Liability in the Retail Industry

When a customer is injured on the premises of a retailer, the retailer may be liable for damages. The cause of action is 'occupiers'liability', which since Australian Safeway Stores v Zaluzna (1987) 162 CLR 479 has been incorporated into the ordinary principles of negligence. This article examines the liability of retailers in the tort of negligence, with particular reference to the required standard of care. The Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic), Occupiers Liability Act 1985 (WA), and Wrongs Act 1936 (SA) are included in the discussion. Cases referred to include Wheat v Lacon [1966] AC 552, Rose v Abbey Orchard Property Investments Pty Ltd (1987) Aust Torts Reports 80-121, Drakos v Woolworths (SA) Ltd (1991) Aust Torts Reports 81-135, Kocis v SE Dickens Pty Ltd (t/as Coles New World Supermarket) (1996) Aust Torts Reports 81-382, Kelly v Lend Lease Retail (1993) Aust Torts Reports 81-216, Griffin v Coles Myer Ltd (1991) Aust Torts Reports 81109, Razic v Cruz [2000] NSWCA 66 and Daily v Spot-On Investments Pty Ltd t/as Spot-On Photos (1995) Aust Torts Reports 81-365