Meyer West IP

30/08/2026

A lot of people treat trade mark registration as a finish line - mark's on the register, job done. This case is a reminder it doesn't always work that way.

In a recent Full Federal Court matter, the Registrar had decided a mark shouldn't have been registered in the first place, because it was too similar to marks already on the register. The dispute went up through the courts over whether pulling the registration was the right call.

What it illustrates is that a registration can be challenged even after it's granted. Being on the register isn't the last word on a mark.

General information only, not legal advice.

23/08/2026

Here's a situation that plays out more often than you'd think: someone leaves an organisation, and suddenly there's a disagreement over who actually owns the work they were involved in.

Deakin University recently went to the Federal Court over exactly this - securing injunctions to stop a former party from claiming ownership of the intellectual property and trade marks tied to one of its research labs.

What it illustrates is a common pattern. The disputes that stay out of court tend to be the ones where ownership was pinned down clearly at the start, rather than argued over once someone's already gone.

General information only, not legal advice.

18/08/2026

Naming a business feels done once you've settled on it. Then someone points out it's a bit close to a brand already out there.

That's roughly what played out in a recent Federal Court case. Swiss shoe brand On Clouds opposed a footwear name, Cyclonic, arguing it was too close to its earlier CYCLON mark. On Clouds lost the first round, appealed, and won. The court found the two too similar - in look, in sound, and in the idea behind them - and refused the registration.

What it shows is how similarity gets weighed up. A different ending doesn't automatically make a mark different enough in the eyes of the court.

General information only, not legal advice.

11/08/2026

Self-healing concrete, wall panels that store and release heat, modular systems locked together on-site - a lot of what's reshaping Australian construction is patentable.

And often it's the connection systems and assembly methods, not just the materials, where the protectable IP sits.

From smart materials to prefabricated systems, discover how patents are powering Australia’s construction boom — and how IP protection can safeguard your building innovations. Meyer West IP explains.

02/08/2026

Record year for Australian trade marks - 97,345 applications in 2025, with filings from Australian residents up 15.1%.

More applications means a busier register, which is worth keeping in mind when you're naming something new.

The full IP Australia report: https://www.ipaustralia.gov.au/tools-and-research/professional-resources/data-research-and-reports/australian-ip-report-2026

This post is general information only and not legal advice.

27/07/2026

Apple is suing OpenAI over alleged trade secret theft. OpenAI says there's no merit to the claim.

Big names, but the underlying issue is one every business deals with: trade secrets aren't registered anywhere. You protect them through how you handle them - access controls, written agreements, and clear exit processes.

This post is general information only and not legal advice.

21/07/2026

An Aboriginal-owned Melbourne streetwear label took on trade mark opposition from The Gap - and a copyright dispute over the Aboriginal flag at the same time.

IP Australia has just published the Clothing The Gaps story (link in comments). It's a good look at what actually happens when a bigger brand opposes your trade mark, and what it takes to hold your ground.

This post is general information only and not legal advice.

13/07/2026

A useful reminder for any business using images in its marketing: "the supplier said it was cleared" may not be enough.

Dua Lipa is suing Samsung for at least US$15 million, claiming it used a photo of her on TV packaging across the US without permission. Samsung hasn't denied using the image - it says a third-party partner provided it and assured them the rights were sorted, including for the boxes.

Whatever the outcome, the takeaway is the same: if an image ends up on your product, relying on someone else's assurance that it was "cleared" may not protect you. And this kind of claim isn't really about copyright - it's about the image making it look like the person endorses your product, when they don't.

If you're putting a face on your packaging or ads, get the permission in writing and make sure it covers how you're actually using it.

This post is general information only and not legal advice.

Source: CNN, 11 May 2026

06/07/2026

A name and logo trade mark won't protect you from "dupes."

Jellycat - the plush toy brand whose limited editions sell out in hours - is suing Next, Hamleys and Bessie London over lookalike soft toys.

The case isn't really about the name. It's about the look: the proportions, the cute faces, the colours, the overall feel that makes the product recognisable.

That's the catch with dupe culture. The cheaper copy doesn't steal your logo - it copies the feel. And a name-and-logo trade mark on its own won't stop it. Protecting a distinctive product usually takes a few rights working together: design rights for the shape, copyright for the artwork, and trade dress for the look and feel.

If how your product looks is part of why people buy it, that look is worth protecting - before it launches.

This post is general information only and not legal advice.

29/06/2026

Lionel Richie has filed four trademark applications - on his own voice.

Not the songs, the actual sound of him singing lines everyone knows, things like "Easy like Sunday morning" and "Say you, say me".

The thinking behind it: copyright protects the song, not the voice.

Trademark might work differently - treating his voice the way a brand treats a sound, similar logic to that little "tu-dum" Netflix plays.

Whether it holds up with the trademark office is a separate question.

This post is general information only and not legal advice.