Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Motorola Solutions, Inc. v Hytera Communications Corporation Ltd (Liability) [2022] FCA 1585 File number: NSD 1283 of 2017
Judgment of: PERRAM J
Date of judgment: 23 December 2022
Catchwords: PATENTS – Applicant patentee of three method patents relating to digital mobile radios ('DMR') using Time Division Multiple Access ('TDMA') to divide frequency channel – disputed constructions – fair basing – inventive step – identification of inventive step in claims – manner of manufacture – stare decisis – whether Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Patents [2022] HCA 29 has a ratio decidendi – whether Full Court decision in Commissioner of Patents v Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd [2021] FCAFC 202 binding for single judge – whether Respondents' non-reprogrammed and reprogrammed DMR devices use methods of patents – secondary liability for importation of DMR devices – authorisation and joint tortfeasorship – whether Respondents took reasonable steps to prevent infringement – injunctive relief – relevance of ETSI Standard – additional damages COPYRIGHT – Applicant owner of Australian copyright in 11 computer programs in source code – importation by First Respondent of DMR devices into Australia containing firmware in object code – firmware compiled from intermediate source code in China and installed into DMR devices in China – First Respondent's intermediate source code developed using Applicant's source code – First Respondent's intermediate source code mostly lost although some available – header and source files – disassembly of object code back into assembly language – whether available intermediate source code copied from Applicant's source code – whether missing intermediate source code copied from Applicant's source code – substantial part – whether the fact that Applicant's programs derived from earlier versions renders them not original for the purposes of infringement – whether First Respondent's object code deemed to be a reproduction of Applicant's source code by s 21(5) of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) – whether compiled object code is an adaptation of Applicant's source code – secondary infringement of Applicant's Australian copyright by importation of DMRs into Australia – whether making firmware available for download in Australia infringement of Applicant's Australian copyright – where copies of firmware made in Australia by Second Respondent and authorised dealers – liability for authorisation and joint tortfeasorship – injunctive relief – additional damages – whether flagrancy to be measured against acts of copying in China or subsequent acts constituting infringement of Australian copyright – whether copying deliberate large scale industrial theft – extent of knowledge of theft within First Respondent – extent of knowledge at time of infringement – whether knowledge to be attributed to First Respondent
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