IPMojo

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

IP

by

Brand Control, Part 9: “From Garage to Global” — Building an International Brand Protection Strategy

Your brand might be born in a garage, a studio, or a co-working hub — but if your business has international ambitions, your trade mark strategy needs to grow up fast.

Exporting? Licensing? Franchising? Operating online with overseas customers? You’ll need more than an Australian trade mark certificate. You’ll need an international brand protection plan.

🌍 Start Local, Think Global

The journey starts at home. To secure international protection, you’ll almost always need to file in your “home” country first. For Australian businesses, that usually means filing with IP Australia before looking abroad.

From there, you have options:

1. The Madrid Protocol
This is the global trade mark filing system administered by WIPO. It lets you extend protection to 130+ member countries through a single application, based on your Australian filing. It’s cost-effective, streamlined, and a good first step into international protection.

2. National Filings
Some jurisdictions don’t play well with the Madrid system. Others may be technically covered by Madrid but are better handled directly due to practical issues or local procedural hurdles. In those cases, it’s worth filing directly through local counsel.

📆 Timing Is Critical

Trade mark rights are territorial — and in some jurisdictions, the “first to file” gets the prize, regardless of who used it first.

Fortunately, the international system gives you a 6-month priority period from the date of your first (Australian) application. If you file overseas within that time, your foreign applications are treated as having the same filing date as your original Australian one.

Miss the window? You risk losing rights to local trade mark squatters — especially in high-risk jurisdictions like China or parts of South America.

✋ Local Sensitivities and Brand Bloopers

Global trade mark strategy isn’t just about paperwork. It’s also about cultural nuance, language, and local business practices.

Brand names that work in English might fall flat — or worse — elsewhere.
The Mitsubishi Pajero famously ran into trouble in Spanish-speaking markets because “pajero” has an unfortunate slang meaning. Even benign names can run into problems if they’re hard to pronounce, culturally insensitive, or already associated with local businesses.

And in China, don’t delay. It’s a strict “first to file” jurisdiction, and trade mark squatting is endemic. If your brand has potential in China, file early — even if you’re not trading there yet.

✅ Practical Tips for Expanding Globally

  • File early: Don’t wait until you enter a market. File when you’re even considering it.

  • Use the Madrid Protocol — but wisely: It’s efficient, but not always the best fit for every country.

  • Check for conflicts: Do clearance searches in each target market to avoid headaches later.

  • Localise carefully: Think about transliteration, local language versions, and regional variants of your mark.

  • Work with local counsel: Especially in high-risk or high-value jurisdictions.

💡 IP Mojo Tip:

Your brand can travel — but it needs a passport.

Registering internationally isn’t just a legal formality. It’s your defence against copycats, squatters, and lost market opportunities.

A global brand strategy doesn’t mean filing everywhere. It means filing smart — in the markets that matter to your business, at the right time, in the right way.

by

Café Conundrum: Black Star Pastry’s Trade Mark Trouble

Richards v Black Star Pastry Pty Ltd (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2G 1226 is a cautionary tale in brand coexistence gone wrong — where parallel growth by two businesses using similar names eventually led to a Federal Circuit and Family Court stoush over coffee, cakes and trade mark rights.

Brewing conflict

Martin Richards and his then-wife started a Brisbane-based social enterprise in 2007 called Blackstar Coffee, roasting beans and selling espresso from carts and cafés. He registered the word mark BLACKSTAR in 2007 and a composite BLACKSTAR COFFEE mark in 2009, covering coffee, coffee beverages and related goods.

Unbeknownst to him at the time, pastry chef Christopher Thé opened a bakery in Newtown, Sydney in 2008 under the name Black Star Pastry — complete with its now-famous strawberry watermelon cake and a reputation that soon spread globally (and virally). Thé registered Black Star Pastry as a business name in 2008 and eventually incorporated Black Star Pastry Pty Ltd (BSP) in 2011.

Though Richards became aware of the Sydney business around 2011 and made contact with Thé, no formal resolution followed. Over the next decade, BSP grew into a multi-store operation in NSW and Victoria, increasingly offering café services and coffee beverages — areas overlapping with Blackstar Coffee’s core trade mark rights.

Trade marks collide

The dispute centred on whether BSP’s use of the phrase BLACK STAR PASTRY — including in logos and retail branding — infringed Richards’ earlier BLACKSTAR marks.

BSP argued that:

  • Its core business was bakery, not coffee;

  • The term Black Star Pastry was distinguishable;

  • Its trade marks had been accepted and registered by IP Australia after amending the specification to exclude “café services” and “specialty coffee retailing”;

  • Any coffee sales were ancillary or covered by its own “bakery services” registrations;

  • Richards had acquiesced by failing to object earlier.

Richards, meanwhile, argued that BSP:

  • Was selling coffee and operating cafés under the Black Star Pastry name;

  • Was using the sign as a trade mark in relation to goods and services covered or closely related to his registrations;

  • Was likely to cause consumer confusion;

  • Couldn’t rely on s 122(1)(e) as a defence because coffee wasn’t squarely within BSP’s registered bakery services;

  • Should not benefit from any perceived delay in enforcement.

The Court’s blend

Judge Manousaridis found in favour of Richards on the infringement claim. The key findings:

  • BSP was using BLACK STAR PASTRY as a trade mark for both coffee and café services.

  • These services were either directly covered by or closely related to the BLACKSTAR registrations.

  • The marks were deceptively similar — particularly given the visual and phonetic similarity, the shared “Black Star” element, and the use in closely related contexts (coffee and cafés).

  • BSP could not rely on its own trade mark registrations as a defence under s 122(1)(e) — because those registrations expressly excluded coffee retailing and café services.

  • Richards’ prior knowledge and phone call with Thé did not amount to acquiescence or delay sufficient to bar relief.

Takeaways: more than just crumbs

This decision serves up some useful reminders:

  • Clearance is key: Registering a business name doesn’t grant trade mark rights — and failing to conduct proper searches can be costly a decade down the line.

  • Expansion needs a check-up: A pivot or expansion into adjacent services (like coffee within a bakery) may breach earlier rights, even if your mark was initially registrable with exclusions.

  • Acquiescence isn’t easily made out: A polite phone call in 2011 won’t shield years of brand growth from an infringement claim — especially when the overlap intensifies over time.

  • Name components matter: While Black Star Pastry and Blackstar Coffee may sound just different enough to lawyers, the average café-goer isn’t parsing the spacing.

In the café world, Black Star may once have stood for two different brands in two different cities — but as the beans (and cakes) spread, the law says one star had to fall.

by

Brand Control, Part 8: “Don’t Touch That Dial” — Monitoring and Enforcing Your Brand Rights

Registering a trade mark isn’t the end of your brand protection journey — it’s the start of your enforcement strategy.

Your registration gives you the legal tools to stop others from using your brand — but your competitors are not going to put their hand up from time to time and say “Hey, I just starting using a trade mark just like yours – hope you don’t mind!”.

Enforcement is not someone else’s job – it’s yours. If you don’t police misuse, you may not just miss an opportunity to stop infringement — you could also weaken your rights over time.

So what does effective brand monitoring and enforcement look like in practice?

👀 Watching the Watch List

If a competitor (or clueless newcomer) adopts a brand that’s similar to yours, you’ll only know about it if you’re actively watching. Here’s how to stay alert:

  • Trade Mark Monitoring: Keep an eye on the IP Australia register. You can use the official ATMOSS search tool, subscribe to their watch notices, use automated platforms like Markify or CompuMark for more comprehensive coverage, or hire an expert IP lawyer to watch for you (click here for details of one expert IP lawyer you should get to know).

  • Google Alerts: Set up alerts for your brand name — and for phonetically or visually similar names too. It’s free and easy, and can alert you to online content that references the brand.

  • Domain and Social Media Monitoring: Watch for new domain registrations, especially .com.au and .com variants. Do the same for social handles — brand impersonation or opportunistic registrations are common, particularly with new or growing businesses.

🛡️ Enforcement Options

Once you detect a potential issue, you’ve got several tools at your disposal. The right approach depends on the facts — and your appetite for escalation.

  • Letter of Demand: Often your first step. It should be firm but not aggressive — and proportionate to the conduct. Overreaching can backfire, both legally and reputationally.

  • Opposition Proceedings: If someone tries to register a trade mark that conflicts with yours, you can oppose the application within the allowed timeframe. Don’t let similar marks slip onto the register unchallenged.

  • Infringement Action: For more serious or persistent issues, you may need to bring proceedings in court. You’ll need to prove use of your registered mark and that the other party’s mark is either substantially identical or deceptively similar.

  • Misleading or Deceptive Conduct: If a competitor’s conduct is causing confusion — even if it doesn’t meet the threshold for trade mark infringement — you may have a claim under the Australian Consumer Law.

  • Passing Off: This common law action protects the goodwill associated with your brand. If a competitor is misrepresenting their goods or services as being connected with yours — for example, by copying your get-up, name, or branding in a way that misleads consumers — you may be able to bring a passing off claim. You’ll need to show that you have a reputation in the mark, that the conduct is likely to cause deception, and that you’ve suffered or are likely to suffer damage. It’s often run alongside an ACL claim, but can also stand alone — especially if your mark isn’t registered.

  • Take-Down Mechanisms: Major platforms (Amazon, Meta, Google, domain registrars) have processes for removing infringing content, counterfeit listings, or cybersquatted domains. These are often faster and cheaper than court action, and can be effective — if you have the paperwork and rights to back it up.

💡 IP Mojo Tip

Silence equals permission. If you don’t act against brand misuse, courts and platforms may assume you’re okay with it. That can hurt your position if you later try to enforce your rights — and it can embolden others to test your boundaries.

Staying vigilant is part of staying strong. A trade mark isn’t just a certificate on a register — it’s a tool to be used. Know when and how to use it, and your brand will thank you later.

by

Copy Paste App? The Pleasures and Pitfalls of Screenshot-to-Code Tools

Imagine this: you take a screenshot of your favourite SaaS dashboard, upload it to a no-code AI tool, and minutes later you have a functioning version of the same interface — layout, buttons, styling, maybe even a working backend prototype. Magic? Almost.

Welcome to the world of screenshot-to-code generators — tools that use AI and no-code logic to replicate functional software from images. These platforms (like Galileo AI, Builder.io, and Uizard) promise rapid prototyping, faster MVP launches, and a lower barrier to entry for founders, designers, and product teams alike.

But while the tech is impressive, the legal waters are murkier. Here’s the pleasure and the pitfall.

🚀 The Pleasure: Design to Prototype at Lightspeed

The promise is seductive:

  • Rapid prototyping: What used to take weeks of front-end dev can now take hours — sometimes minutes.

  • Visual to functional: AI converts static designs (or even screenshots of existing apps) into working interfaces with mock data or basic logic.

  • Lower costs: Startups or solo devs can build more for less — less code, less labour, and less time.

Tools like Galileo AI and Uizard are being used to generate mock admin panels, mobile UI concepts, and even pitch-ready MVPs. They’re ideal for internal dashboards, client demos, or iterating fast before investing in full-stack builds.

But many users go further — taking screengrabs from existing platforms (think Notion, Salesforce, Figma, Xero) and asking the AI to “make me one of these.”

And that’s where the problems begin.

⚠️ The Pitfall: Copyright, Clones, and Clean Hands

Just because a tool can replicate an interface doesn’t mean you should — especially if your starting point is a screenshot of someone else’s software.

Here are the big legal traps to watch out for:

1. Copyright in the Interface

While copyright doesn’t protect ideas, it does protect expressions — including graphic design, layout, icons, fonts, and even the “look and feel” of certain interfaces. If your cloned UI copies the visual design of another product too closely, you may be infringing copyright (or at least inviting a legal headache).

Australia’s Desktop Marketing Systems v Telstra [2002] FCAFC 112 reminds us that copyright can exist in compilations of data or structure — not just in pretty pictures.

2. Trade Dress and Reputation

Even if your app doesn’t copy the code, a lookalike interface could fall foul of passing off or misleading conduct laws under the Australian Consumer Law if it creates confusion with an established brand. That risk increases if you’re operating in a similar space or targeting the same user base.

The global tech giants have deep pockets — and they’ve sued for less.

3. Terms of Use Breaches

Many platforms prohibit copying or reverse engineering their interfaces. Uploading screenshots of their product to an AI builder might violate their terms of service — even if your clone is only for internal use.

This isn’t just theory: platforms like OpenAI and Figma already use automated tools to detect and act on terms breaches — especially those that risk commercial leakage or brand dilution.

4. No Excuse Just Because the Tool Did It

You can’t hide behind the AI. If your clone infringes IP rights, you’re liable — not the platform that helped you build it. The tool is just that: a tool.

In legal terms, there’s no “my AI made me do it” defence.

🤔 So What Can You Do?

  • ✅ Use these tools for original designs: Sketch your own wireframes, then let the AI flesh them out.

  • ✅ Take inspiration, not duplication: You can draw ideas from good UI — but avoid replicating them pixel-for-pixel.

  • ✅ Use public design systems: Many platforms release UI kits and components under open licences (e.g., Material UI, Bootstrap). Start there.

  • ✅ Keep it internal: If you must replicate an existing interface to test functionality, don’t deploy it publicly — and definitely don’t commercialise it.

  • ✅ Get advice: If you’re close to the line (or don’t know where the line is), speak to an IP lawyer early. Clones are cheaper than court.

🧠 Final Thought: Just Because You Can…

…doesn’t mean you should.

AI is rapidly transforming the way software is built — but it’s also tempting users to cut corners on IP. Using these tools responsibly means treating screenshots not just as pixels, but as possibly protected property.

Build fast — but build clean.

by

Brand Control, Part 7: “Beyond the Logo” — Trade Marking Product Shapes, Sounds, and Scents

When most people think of trade marks, they picture logos or brand names — the usual suspects. But in the eyes of the law, a trade mark is any “sign” capable of distinguishing your goods or services. That opens the door to a broader, bolder set of brand assets.

Welcome to the world of non-traditional trade marks — where shapes, sounds, colours, and even scents can be legally protected.

🧴 What Can You Register?

Some of the most iconic brand cues aren’t names or logos — they’re sensory experiences. And if consumers link that experience to your business, it might just qualify for registration.

Shapes
Examples:

  • The triangular prism of a Toblerone bar

  • The unmistakable contour of a Coca-Cola bottle

But be warned: shape marks face serious scrutiny. If the shape is dictated by function or gives a competitive advantage (like a handle or grip), it likely won’t qualify. The Mayne Industries decision is a key example of this strict approach.

Sounds
Think:

  • The MGM lion’s roar

  • The McDonald’s “I’m lovin’ it” jingle

To register, the sound must be distinctive and consistently used as a badge of origin — not just part of an ad.

Scents
Rare, but not impossible. One of the few global successes? A floral fragrance registered in the U.S. for sewing thread. Australia is stricter — but if you can prove that your scent is uniquely linked to your brand (and not functional), it may stand a chance.

Fun fact: As at the date of publishing this blog post, there are only two registered scent marks in Australia – one being for a eucalyptus scent applied to golf tees, and the other for a cinnamon scent applied to non-wood based furniture.

How oddly specific …

Colours
Cadbury’s battle to protect its signature purple (Pantone 2685C) is the most high-profile example in Australia. Colour marks are hard to secure — especially for common colours or combinations — but can be powerful if consumers identify them with your business.

🎢 The Legal Hurdles

These marks face a higher bar than standard word or logo marks. Here’s why:

  • Inherent distinctiveness is rare. Most non-traditional marks only succeed if they’ve acquired distinctiveness through long-term, exclusive use.

  • Functionality kills applications. If a shape or sound serves a practical or aesthetic purpose, it’s unlikely to pass.

  • You’ll need evidence. Think sales volumes, advertising spend, market surveys, and media references that link the feature to your brand.

This isn’t checkbox territory — it’s prove-your-case territory.

💡 IP Mojo Tip

Your brand isn’t limited to what you can type or sketch. If your product’s shape, jingle, colour, or even fragrance makes people think of you — and no one else — you may be sitting on a powerful trade mark.

Just remember: non-traditional doesn’t mean non-challenging. You’ll need to back it up with serious evidence. But for brands that break the mould, the legal protection is well worth the effort.

by

Brand Control, Part 6: “Use It or Lose It” — Genuine Use and Trade Mark Non-Use Risks

Registering a trade mark is a powerful step in protecting your brand — but it’s not a “set and forget” exercise. A trade mark registration gives you exclusive rights, but only as long as you’re actually using the mark. If not, those rights can be challenged — and even removed.

Welcome to the world of non-use risk.

⏳ The Non-Use Sword of Damocles

Under section 92 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth), a registered trade mark can be removed from the register — in whole or in part — if it hasn’t been genuinely used in Australia for a continuous period of three years.

It’s not enough to just own the registration. If someone applies to remove your mark, and you haven’t been using it properly, the burden shifts to you (under section 100) to prove genuine use.

You get a couple of years’ grace when you first apply to register a mark – no-one is allowed to strike it out for non-use within its first five years.  However, after that period, if you haven’t got evidence of use of the mark as a trade mark within the last three years, practically anyone can apply to IP Australia to strike the registration out for non-use.

It’s also important to note that minimal or token use — or use for goods/services that fall outside your registered classes — might not be enough to save the mark.

✅ What Counts as “Genuine Use”?

Genuine use means real commercial use — not legal window-dressing.

Examples include:

  • Selling goods or services under the mark in Australia

  • Use of the mark on product packaging, websites, online listings, advertisements, invoices or other customer-facing materials

  • Promotional campaigns that demonstrate actual market exposure

Crucially, the use must occur in Australia, or in the jurisdiction where the mark is registered. International use won’t save an Australian registration.

❌ What Doesn’t Count?

Some activities may feel like “use”, but the law may see them differently — especially if challenged:

  • Trade mark squatting — registering marks with no intent to use them, just to block others or hold for ransom

  • Keeping a dormant website with no actual trading activity

  • Intra-group transfers or token licensing that generate no public exposure or commercial sales

Courts are good at sniffing out contrived “use” made only to defend against a removal action.

💡 IP Mojo Tip

Use it like you mean it.

A registered trade mark is only as strong as the use that backs it.  You should:

✔️ Keep good records of sales, ads, online listings and brand use.

✔️ Don’t register in broad classes “just in case” unless you can genuinely support that use.

✔️ If you’re not using part of your registration — and don’t plan to — consider cleaning it up proactively before someone else forces the issue.