Acohs Pty Ltd v Ucorp Pty Ltd (No 5) [2013] FCA 1006

Acohs Pty Ltd v Ucorp Pty Ltd (No 5) [2013] FCA 1006

The Court held that the Blackwoods copying was covered by implied licence because Blackwoods requested Ucorp to provide access to MSDSs for the same safety-related need previously supplied by Acohs. Acohs did not prove that Victoria University would have engaged Acohs rather than Ucorp but for the presence of Acohs-authored MSDSs in The Collection. Compensatory damages and interest were therefore rejected. However, Ucorp had reproduced a large number of Acohs-authored MSDSs in infringement of copyright and derived a benefit from having them in The Collection, justifying additional damages of $22,500 under s 115(4). A deletion order was appropriate to reduce the risk of future use of...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Copyright Infringement Remedies Proceeding / Final Relief After Remittal From the Full Court, With Costs Reserved for Later Submissions
Outcome
Application otherwise dismissed save for injunctive relief against the second respondent, identification and deletion orders, additional damages of $22,500, and costs to be determined later.
Legal Topics
['copyright Infringement' 'material Safety Data Sheets' 'injunctions' 'delivery Up and Deletion of Infringing Copies' 'compensatory Damages' 'additional Damages' 'implied Licence' 'costs Reserved']
['intellectual Property' 'copyright' 'damages'] ['copyright Infringement' 'material Safety Data Sheets' 'injunctions' 'delivery Up and Deletion of Infringing Copies' 'compensatory Damages' 'additional Damages' 'implied Licence' 'costs Reserved']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Copyright Infringement Remedies Proceeding / Final Relief After Remittal From the Full Court, With Costs Reserved for Later Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Dr Bialkower should be restrained in the same terms as the injunction previously made against Ucorp.' 'Whether the respondents should be required to identify and permanently delete copies of Acohs-authored copyright works stored on electronic storage devices.' "Whether Ucorp's copying of Blackwoods MSDSs was covered by an implied licence." 'Whether Acohs proved compensatory damages for loss of the Blackwoods business or Victoria University business.' 'Whether additional damages should be awarded under s 115(4) of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the Blackwoods copying was covered by implied licence because Blackwoods requested Ucorp to provide access to MSDSs for the same safety-related need previously supplied by Acohs. Acohs did not prove that Victoria University would have engaged Acohs rather than Ucorp but for the presence of Acohs-authored MSDSs in The Collection. Compensatory damages and interest were therefore rejected. However, Ucorp had reproduced a large number of Acohs-authored MSDSs in infringement of copyright and derived a benefit from having them in The Collection, justifying additional damages of $22,500 under s 115(4). A deletion order was appropriate to reduce the risk of future use of...

Court Disposition

Application otherwise dismissed save for injunctive relief against the second respondent, identification and deletion orders, additional damages of $22,500, and costs to be determined later.

Orders

  • ['In the orders, "copyright works" means any of the material safety data sheets listed as "Authored by ACOHS" in Annexure A and Annexure A1 to the Amended Particulars of Copyright Ownership dated 31 August 2009.' 'The second respondent, whether by his servants, agents or otherwise, is restrained from, without the...