TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 3
Main body 3
Issue 1 3
Case facts 3
Legal provisions 3
Applicability on the case 4
Recommendation 4
Issue 2 4
Case facts 4
Legal provisions 4
Applicability on the case 4
Recommendation 4
Conclusion 4
INTRODUCTION
The IP law of Australia is made to promote the innovations and also protect those businesses that develop the original intellectual property for having the benefits of being competitive. In Australia, there are also participants from a number of international agreements which protects the Act in the other countries. IP Australia is the agency of government which administrates the legislation and rights of IP. The present study is focused on the description of various laws related to infringement of …show more content…
However, this provision will not be applicable in a situation where concerned information is common knowledge and does not have the necessary quality of confidentiality. This has been described in the case of Thomas Marshall (Exports) v Guinle [1979] ch 227 . In this case, it has been clarified that for applicability of this aspect, it is essential to ensure that information is supported by the application of skill and originality of human brains to ensure that it is a trade secret . This factor shows that novelty of information is based on itself, not on the constituent parts. For the application of the second requirement, plaintiff had communicated the information in a situation where there was the obligation of confidence. This obligation cannot be imposed if this information can be blurted in public . Last but not the least there must be unauthorised use of confidential information with the intention to have an undue …show more content…
By considering the entire situation, Rueben is required to complete the registration process of a trade secret to ensure that his technology is not copied to take undue advantage. Further, he can justify the case to the previous employer in reply to his notice, but if he is still not satisfied then in court, he can justify the point that trade secret developed by him, is due to skills and knowledge not merely consideration of the business process of Kapital Kool. Further, using of work experience cannot be considered the unethical use of business
Introduction 3
Main body 3
Issue 1 3
Case facts 3
Legal provisions 3
Applicability on the case 4
Recommendation 4
Issue 2 4
Case facts 4
Legal provisions 4
Applicability on the case 4
Recommendation 4
Conclusion 4
INTRODUCTION
The IP law of Australia is made to promote the innovations and also protect those businesses that develop the original intellectual property for having the benefits of being competitive. In Australia, there are also participants from a number of international agreements which protects the Act in the other countries. IP Australia is the agency of government which administrates the legislation and rights of IP. The present study is focused on the description of various laws related to infringement of …show more content…
However, this provision will not be applicable in a situation where concerned information is common knowledge and does not have the necessary quality of confidentiality. This has been described in the case of Thomas Marshall (Exports) v Guinle [1979] ch 227 . In this case, it has been clarified that for applicability of this aspect, it is essential to ensure that information is supported by the application of skill and originality of human brains to ensure that it is a trade secret . This factor shows that novelty of information is based on itself, not on the constituent parts. For the application of the second requirement, plaintiff had communicated the information in a situation where there was the obligation of confidence. This obligation cannot be imposed if this information can be blurted in public . Last but not the least there must be unauthorised use of confidential information with the intention to have an undue …show more content…
By considering the entire situation, Rueben is required to complete the registration process of a trade secret to ensure that his technology is not copied to take undue advantage. Further, he can justify the case to the previous employer in reply to his notice, but if he is still not satisfied then in court, he can justify the point that trade secret developed by him, is due to skills and knowledge not merely consideration of the business process of Kapital Kool. Further, using of work experience cannot be considered the unethical use of business