Articles

CBA Members

Propriété
intellectuelle

Section du droit de la propriété intellectuelle de l’ABC

Les articles de la Section du droit de la propriĂ©tĂ© intellectuelle de l’ABC sont publiĂ©s par la Section du droit de la propriĂ©tĂ© intellectuelle. Les membres qui souhaitent proposer des articles sont invitĂ©s Ă  les envoyer Ă  la section Ă  : droitproprieteintellectuelleABC@cba.org.

AujourdĘĽhui
AujourdĘĽhui

Case summary: Reverse class action affirmed in copyright infringement claim

  • 18 novembre 2021
  • Homira Haqani

In this case, Voltage Pictures, LLC, a group of production companies (“Voltage”), sought certification of a respondent class proceeding, known as a “reverse class action.” Voltage alleged copyright infringement of five of its films and contended that the Appellant, and Respondent on cross-appeal, Robert Salna, had infringed its copyright by enabling the films to be downloaded through BitTorrent, a protocol for peer-to-peer sharing.

Propriété intellectuelle

Federal Court declines to award lump sum costs

  • 18 novembre 2021
  • Natasha Gulati

This decision of the Court of Appeal on costs follows the Court’s decision of May 26, 2021, in which it upheld a Federal Court decision awarding the respondents an interlocutory injunction in a copyright infringement action.

Propriété intellectuelle

Case Summary: Federal Court of Appeal affirms Eli Lilly’s right to damages and interest after decades-long battle with Apotex

  • 18 novembre 2021
  • Kenneth Clark and Jose Garcia Bonilla

In 1997, Eli Lilly US and Eli Lilly Canada (collectively, “Eli Lilly”) brought an action against Apotex Inc., (“Apotex”) claiming damages for patent infringement under s.55(1) of the Patent Act for its bulk import of cefaclor for use in Apo-cefaclor, which it sold in Canada. In 2014, the Federal Court awarded damages for lost profits, and an award of compound interest. Apotex appealed both.

Propriété intellectuelle

Jurisdiction of the Federal Court does not extend to issuing an injunction pursuant to Section 39 of the Canadian Environmental Protections Act

  • 17 novembre 2021
  • William S. Foster

Glowfish LLC (“Glofish”) brought proceedings seeking injunctions under the Trademarks Act (the “TMA”), Canadian Environment Protection Act, 1999 (the “CEPA”), and New Substances Notification Regulations (Organisms) as against Oceanview Enterprise (“Oceanview”) and Animalerie Auqa Terra (“Aqua Terra”) with respect to various activities involving genetically engineered fluorescent fish.

Propriété intellectuelle

King vs. Kingsford: Likelihood of confusion upheld on appeal

  • 17 novembre 2021
  • Peter W. Choe

Tokai filed a trademark application for KING for barbeque and fireplace lighters, and for cigarette lighters. Kingsford successfully opposed the application based upon its KINGSFORD marks. Tokai brought an appeal to the Federal Court, principally basing its appeal on the issue of likelihood of confusion between KING and registrations for KINGSFORD.

Propriété intellectuelle

Case summary: Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Canada

  • 17 novembre 2021
  • Cheryl Cheung

This appeal dealt with a judgment of the Federal Court, which dismissed an application for judicial review brought by Alexion in respect of a decision by the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (the “Board”). The Board had concluded that Alexion priced its Soliris product excessively contrary to the Patent Act and ordered Alexion to forfeit excess revenues earned between 2009 and 2017.

Propriété intellectuelle