The Copyright Modernization Act (C-11) has passed parliament and received Royal Assent. The Act makes significant amendments to various aspects of the Copyright Act including to fair dealing, technological protection measures, educational use and performer’s rights. It comes into force on a date to be fixed by cabinet, likely with corresponding regulations.
On Friday, Judge Posner, sitting as a trial judge, dismissed with prejudice patent infringement litigation between Apple and Motorola on the basis that no damages could be proven by either side. Judge Posner stated that proof of infringement alone was not enough to warrant a remedial order, such as damages, an injunction or a declaration.
Justice Catherine M. Kane has been appointed a judge of the Federal Court effective immediately replacing Justice Simpson who elected to become a supernumerary judge. Justice Kane was a lawyer with the Department of Justice Canada in Ottawa practicing in the area of criminal law.
Justice Hughes issued a decision in Allergen v. Apotex 2012 FC 767 (Brimonidine) earlier this week. He determined that Apotex’s allegation of obviousness was justified but granted the prohibition order on the basis that an earlier decision of Justice Crampton on the same patents, but different parties (2011 FC 1316) was contrary and therefore an issue of comity should be considered by the Federal Court of Appeal. The decision and a summary is available from Beeser Ramamoorthy.
Proposed new regulations formalizing procedures before the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board were published in yesterday’s Canada Gazette.
Master Short released a decision on the standing of patent licensees to be added as plaintiffs-by-counterclaim in an Ontario Court proceeding relating to lansoprazole.
It just came to my attention that an ex parte injunction against the author of allegedly defamatory works, Go Daddy as the domain name provider and Google for providing search functionality, which I previously reported, has been dissolved.
The British Columbia Court in Nazerali v. Mitchell, 2011 BCSC 1846, heard submissions on extending the injunction. The judge considered the defenses to defamation raised by the individual defendant and the breadth of the injunction in the decision.