Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Pacific Publications Pty Limited v Next Publishing Pty Limited [2005] FCA 625 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – misleading or deceptive conduct – passing off – tween girl magazines – appellant published "Total Girl" magazine – appellant published a one-off "Girl Power Issue" and "Girl Power Poster Book" – respondent commenced publication and distribution of "Girl Power" magazine – whether applicant had acquired a substantial reputation in the cover and internal elements of "Total Girl" – whether applicant had acquired a substantial reputation in the expression "Girl Power" – similarities between cover and internal elements of the magazines – allegation that these similarities create a misleading impression in the minds tweens and purchasers of the magazines that there is an association between the publishers of the two magazines – discussion of classes of persons alleged to be misled or deceived – whether respondent was aware of, or intended to, copy the format used in "Total Girl" – whether sufficient similarity exists between the two magazines to conclude that there has been any copying or misleading or deceptive conduct – comparison with other tween girl magazines EVIDENCE – rule in Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 – strengthening of adverse inferences by failure to call witnesses – whether any adverse inferences arise
Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) ss 52, 53
Erven Warnink BV v JW Townsend & Sons (Hull) Ltd [1979] AC 731 cited Reckitt & Coleman Products v Borden Inc (1990) 1 WLR 491 cited AG Spalding & Bros v AW Gamage Ltd (1915) 32 RPC 273 cited Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v Pub Squash Co Pty Ltd [1981] RPC 429 cited Annand & Thompson Pty Ltd v Trade Practices Commission (1979) 40 FLR 165 referred to CRW Pty Limited v Sneddon (1972) AR (NSW) 17 referred to Moorgate Tobacco Co Limited v Philip Morris Limited & Anor (No 2) (1984) 156 CLR 414 referred to Campomar Sociedad Limitada v Nike International Limited (2000) 202 CLR 45 applied Parkdale Custom Built Furniture Pty Ltd v Puxu Pty Ltd (1982) 149 CLR 191 referred to Tobacco Institute of Australia Limited v Australian Federation of Consumer Organisations Inc (1992) 38 FCR 1 applied Pacific Dunlop Ltd v Hogan & Ors (1989) 23 FCR 553 considered R & C Products Pty Ltd trading as Samuel Taylor v S C Johnson & Sons Pty Ltd (1993) 113 ALR 487 cited Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation v The South Australian Brewing Co Ltd (1996) 66 FCR 451 cited Energizer Australia Pty Limited v Gillette Australia Pty Limited (2001) 189 ALR 480 cited Seven Network Ltd v News Interactive Pty Ltd (2004) 63 IPR 28 cited Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles (2001) 52 NSWLR 705 referred to Pacific Publications Pty Limited v IPC Media Pty Ltd (2003) AIPC 91-869 referred to Australian Woollen Knitting Mills Ltd v FS Walton & Co Ltd (1937) 58 CLR 641 cited Kettle Chip Co Pty Ltd v Apand Pty Ltd (1993) 46 FCR 152 cited Children's Television Workshop Inc v Woolworths (NSW) Ltd (1981) 1 NSWLR 273 discussed Topps Co Inc v Tom Hannah (Agencies) Limited [1999] Scot CS 285 discussed
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate