Autodesk Inc v Dyason [No_2] [1993] HCA 6

High Court of Australia Mason C.J. Brennan, Deane, Dawson and Gaudron JJ. Autodesk Inc v Dyason [No 2] [1993] HCA 6

ORDER Appeal allowed with costs. Orders 1, 3 and 4 of the Full Court of the Federal Court set aside and in lieu thereof order that:

(1) order 1 of Northrop J. dated 15 September 1989 be varied by ordering that:

(a) Martin Patrick Dyason, Christine Dyason and Peter Vincent Kelly, and each of them, whether by themselves, their servants, agents or howsoever otherwise, be restrained from —

(i) reproducing in any material form the whole, or a substantial part, of the computer program known as "Autocad ";

(ii) selling or letting for hire, or by way of trade, offering, or exposing for sale or hire, any article, being a reproduction of the whole, or a substantial part, of the said computer program.

(b) Martin Patrick Dyason, Christine Dyason and Peter Vincent Kelly, and each of them, whether by themselves, their servants, agents or howsoever otherwise, be restrained from reproducing in any material form the whole, or a substantial part, of the 127-bit series look-up table in the said computer program and, more particularly, in that part of the computer program known as "Widget C".

(2) the appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court by Martin Patrick Dyason, Christine Dyason and Peter Vincent Kelly be otherwise dismissed with costs.

Remit the matter to the Federal Court of Australia, Victoria District Registry, for a directions hearing on a date to be fixed for directions as to its further conduct.

Cur. adv. vult.

The following written judgments were delivered:—

1993, March 3 Mason C.J.

I agree with the reasons given by Dawson J. for concluding that the respondents have failed to establish that, without fault on their part, they were afforded no opportunity of being heard on the questions which proved to be decisive in the determination of the appeal in Autodesk Inc. v Dyason [1] .