Chelsea Gordon

Enforcement can be onerous for IP owners. The burden generally falls on the owner to do the enforcing. IP Australia doesn’t do it for you. As this article by Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) reported, this can be particularly hard on small business owners: https://lnkd.in/gyx6ABTC.   What are the simple steps that you can take to make it easier for you? 1. Be ever watchful. Especially with trade mark infringement, catching the infringement early can make it easier to get the infringer to back down. Once they have invested years in building goodwill in their infringing trade mark, they’ll probably fight any demand tooth and nail. 2. Consider registering your IP right with Australian Border Force, to try to get infringing products seized at the point of import. 3. Use the IP protection policies of Amazon, eBay, etc to deny smaller infringers a marketplace. 4. If you don’t have the capacity to scale your patent or design, consider whether you are better off licensing or selling it to a major player with the clout to enforce its rights against infringers. 5. Make an example of one infringer, to give credibility to your threats against others. Even if you settle the dispute, consider omitting obligations of confidentiality on the settlement terms so that you can tell others how much it cost the infringer. 6. Consider making a pragmatic demand of the infringer that is more likely to be agreed to. For example, allowing the infringer to sell down existing stock or pay an ongoing licence, rather than requiring immediate recall and destruction of infringing stock. Unfortunately, dealing with infringers sometimes resembles a game of “whack a mole”. If you need some help stamping out those pesky moles, get in touch. #macphersonkelley #ipinfringement #patentinfringement #trademarkinfringement #iplaw

7

4 Comments

Published in a our Health Bulletin, this article provides a comprehensive go-to checklist to help navigate the revised TGA advertising guidelines for cosmetic injectables. We take pride in seeing our clients adjust their practices so quickly. Specific terms such as ‘Botox’ and ‘Fillers’ are now prohibited 🚫. Thank you to Sarah Morian for her work on this, and Scott Chapman for his support: https://lnkd.in/ggHnbhxJ #healthlaw #tgaguidelines #cosmeticmedicine

27

1 Comment

Australian privacy policy AI updates needed under proposed new laws Could AI-assisted decisions made by your business about individuals reasonably be expected to significantly affect their rights or interests? Under Privacy Act changes introduced into the Australian federal parliament today, privacy policies for your business may well need to be updated within 2 years after the new law receives Royal Assent. The privacy policy updates would need to provide information about - the kinds of personal information your business uses for automated decision-making - the kinds of decisions your business makes solely by automated means and - the kinds of decisions to which automated means are substantially and directly related. Under the proposed law, failing or refusing to make a decision is covered and it would not matter that the decision’s impact on the individual is good or bad. If a required privacy policy update is not made, a civil penalty may be imposed. Currently the civil penalties for serious or repeated privacy interferences are - for those other than companies, $2.5 million - for companies the greater of $50 million; three times the value of the benefit obtained by the company from the conduct or, if that cannot be determined, 30% of the company’s adjusted turnover. Forthcoming Sharpe Ivo data law updates will tease out some key points for businesses about these changes.

21

1 Comment

AHPRA (Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency) has published guidance outlining how practitioners can meet their professional obligations when using #AI. Key points: 🔑 Human in the loop - the practitioner is responsible for quality care, meeting their professional obligations, and checking AI scribed notes are accurate. 🔑 Understanding- the practitioner must understand how the tool works, and at a minimum, understand ‘how it’s trained and tested on populations, intended use, and limitations and clinical contexts where’ the AI should not be used. It is also important to understand how the data is being used to retrain the AI, where data is located, and how it is stored. 🔑 Transparency- the practitioner must inform the patient that, and how, AI will be used. 🔑 Informed consent- the practitioner must involve patients in the decision to use AI tools that require input of their personal patient data, and if a patient’s data is required for care. That consent should be recorded in the patient record. Check it out here 🌟 https://lnkd.in/dvb2z_ht

45

1 Comment

AHPRA (Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency) has published case studies exploring medico legal risks arising from some key AI use cases. The case studies indicate that health regulators are taking a strict approach, and expect health practitioners to consider the legal, privacy and security risks of AI BEFORE using it. This confirms our firm view that a governance first approach is vital when employing new AI, especially in high risk settings such as healthcare. It will be inadequate to use AI in a sloppy fashion as an afterthought. To read the case studies follow this link 👇🏼 https://lnkd.in/gcB4nMNQ Siobhan Beckett Fiona Chui Mehmet Kavlakoglu

23

My Dentons colleagues Robyn Chatwood and Peter Divitcos explore in the article below how using a VPN is no defence if that use means you are breaching contractual prohibitions or infringing IP rights. #VPN #IP #Dentons

6

For an overview of key privacy developments over the past 12 months, and areas to watch, check out our Guide below. #privacy

19

3 Comments

Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus KC MP has indicated that privacy reforms will be brought forward to August 2024. Current privacy legislation provides limited protections for individual privacy, and at present, there is no recourse for individuals where privacy is invaded in circumstances which fall outside the scope of the Privacy Act. Australian common law has not developed a tort of privacy, although the High Court of Australia has left this possibility open (in Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd [2001] 208 CLR 199 and Smethurst v Commissioner of Police [2020] HCA 14). Against this background, there have been various law reform processes considering whether a tort of privacy should be introduced. In 2014, the Australia Law Reform Commission (ALRC) proposed a particular model for a statutory tort in its report, Serious Invasions of Privacy in the Digital Era. The ALRC Model is a relatively technical cause of action. It will require a court to assess multiple complex questions of fact and law before liability is established, including: 1. The invasion of privacy must be either by: (a) intrusion into seclusion; or (b) misuse of private information 2. It must be proved that a person in the position of the plaintiff would have had a reasonable expectation of privacy in all the circumstances. 3. The invasion must have been committed intentionally or recklessly – mere negligence is not sufficient. 4. the invasion must be "serious" 5. the invasion need not cause actual damage, and damages for emotional distress may be awarded, and 6. it is subject to a "balancing exercise" – the court must be satisfied that the public interest in privacy outweighs any countervailing public interests The 2014 model provides a variety of remedies including damages (including for emotional distress), account of profits, injunctions, correction and apology orders and declarations. On 16 February 2023, the Attorney General's Department conducted a review of the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) and related privacy issues. Those findings included a recommendation that "individuals have more agency to seek redress for interferences with their privacy through the courts", including by the introduction of a statutory tort of serious invasion of privacy, based on the ALRC Model. In the Government Response: Privacy Act Review published on 28 September 2023, it agreed in principle to introduce the statutory tort for serious invasions of privacy. Businesses should take immediate steps to assess whether any business practices are likely to be affected by the introduction of this new law.   

9

1 Comment

Well - it was a long time coming and after more than four years in the making, the first tranche of reforms of the Australian Privacy Act have been introduced into parliament. While the privacy world has not been expecting to see all of the “agreed” or “agreed in principle” reforms, expectations were high that we would see some of the fundamental and much needed reforms to the Privacy Act. The Bill certainly left us feeling like it’s the amuse bouche and hungry for more, with a relatively limited set of reforms being included. However, there are some interesting new provisions including a new statutory tort and criminal offence, and changes to enforcement and breach management powers. And, as with everything privacy and data, there may be some unintended consequences for APP entities. We will be publishing more analysis and insight over the next few days – sign up to our blog ‘A&O Shearman on data’ to find out more. Ross Phillipson Yik Yuen Chong Cara Burley A&O Shearman #APAC #privacy #cyber A&O Shearman | Preference Manager | International Law Firm with Global Reach | Login (aoshearman.com)

54

Emantra is one of the select few hosting services providers that have obtained the HCF certification. It is a rigorous process to ensure that the Australian Federal Government has a go to list of secure providers. As a HCF certified provider Emantra can explain with a unique perspective the benefits of the HCF certification. Watch the video below to find out more about the HCF certification 👇🏼

11

Kia ora everyone I hope everyone is enjoying the wonderful glory of the Olympic Games. Here’s something which has nothing to do with the Olympics (believe me I tried to create a link, but there’s no bow long enough in the entire Olympic archery arsenal to link the Olympics to this Aotearoa New Zealand trade mark case!). It’s a trade mark case comparing two trade marks in different languages. The High Court of New Zealand has little difficulty finding that they are similar, despite being complete different aurally and visually. A gold medal case for ip lawyers! #iplaw #trademarklaw #nzlaw #newzealand

17

Heads up - changes to the way excess claim fees are calculated for patents in Australia are on the way for applications where examination is requested on or after 1 October 2024. In short - excess claim fees will now be due shortly after the first examination report issues if there are more than 21 claims examined in the report. More information is available in my article here: https://lnkd.in/gcq8nMH2

15

1 Comment

At #AusBio24 we’re considering #ai with Pip Karoly David Hansen and Tim Boyle moderated by Sylvie Tso 📋 digitising of health records has made possible the deployment of #ai to work with that data and be trained on it 💡 #ai can assist all along the development pathway 🛤️ noting the introduction of voluntary guardrails in Australia, we already have guardrails in the TGA where #ai has a diagnostic or therapeutic application but many applications don’t fall within TGA regulations ➡️ don’t over complicate things—you don’t always need the high powered version 🔀 think about #bias in the AI and also in how you use its outputs 🤖 #dataprotection is key 🧑‍🏫👩‍🏫 meaningful human oversight is important—data analysis doesn’t replace human involvement 📦 one of the guardrails is transparency, but being too transparent may undermine the protection of your IP

31

1 Comment

My Dentons colleague Roy Leigh and I explore the latest Australian AI reforms in the article below, focusing on key practical considerations when procuring or developing AI solutions. #AI #Dentons

12

2 Comments

Datatrack welcomes the IRO update for MRP fees. In a recent alert, IRO NSW proposed a change to the payment of service fees to Medical Report Providers (MRPs) for Approved Lawyers (ALs) requesting medical evidence using MRPs platform. " IRO is proposing, subject to feedback, to cease paying service fees to MRPs for any medical evidence requested after 31 October 2024. Law firms may continue to use MRPs but, from this date, will need to pay this fee as part of their professional costs." - Jeffrey Gabriel, Independent Review Officer  It is important to know that Datatrack offers full financial transparency when disclosing our fees so that law firms are fully aware of any costs for service. Datatrack leads the sector in disclosing their fees for law firms and their clients, with some important points to note: 💥 No hidden costs or gouging - all fees are disclosed so you and your clients know the costs for your matters. 💥 We offer FAST turnaround times. 💥 Competition ensures you receive the best records retrieval services possible. 💥 Free your legal teams up to focus on more important matters. 💥 Datatrack have over 90 thousand clinics with key contact people for records on our database 💥 Due to extensive industry relationships, we are much faster at getting the data your firm needs. Here are the links directly to IRO updates. https://lnkd.in/gzaF8vHt https://lnkd.in/guNHu-Du

3

Discover the New Zealand Legal Market Overview 2025. We’re excited to share our comprehensive New Zealand Legal Market Overview 2024/2025—your essential guide to navigating the evolving legal landscape. Whether you're a legal professional or an organisation seeking top talent, this report is packed with valuable insights on market trends, salary expectations, and key challenges ahead. Stay ahead of the curve and empower your decision-making with the latest data. Download the guide now and prepare for the year ahead: https://lnkd.in/gA8Eyiss #NZLegalMarketOverview2025 #LegalInsights #RobertWalters #LegalCareers #MarketTrends

10

Health Legal's recognition in the inaugural edition of Best Law Firms – Australia, as published in The Australian on Friday, highlights our firm's exceptional legal expertise in Health and Aged Care Law. Best Law Firms' explains of its Regional Rankings in Australia: "Among all the firms that were eligible for the 2025 Best Law Firms consideration in Australia, representing the top 2% of firms across the country. The rankings honour law firms of varying sizes and scopes, across 8 geographical regions and 83 practice areas. Ahead, we present all regionally ranked firms in Australia across all three tiers." Click on the link below for more information on Best Law Firms Australia 2025 Edition. #bestlawyers #law #australia #healthlaw #agedcare #lawyers

15

Get your Consumer Law news from Practical Guidance! How are you keeping up to date with consumer law in 2024? Get your quick fix of legal news, key cases, legislative changes, and regulator reforms from the experts at Practical Guidance. Learn more here: https://ow.ly/2lSm50RkOXO #practicalguidance #legalupdates #legalnews #consumerlaw

1