Faceted gold icosahedron gem
A geometric jewel/gem illustration made of polygon facets shaded in rich gold tones from pale amber-gold at the top to deep amber-brown at the bottom.
Insights
Intellectual property expertise
Registered IP rights
Patents
Technological innovation is protected by patent rights
Registered designs
Aesthetic and visual features are protected by registered designs
Registered trade marks
Branding is protected by registered trade marks
Advisory services
Software patents
Software patents require a particular skill set
Startup IP strategy
Strategic insight and execution are essential
Portfolio building
A robust vision and strategy provides direction
Client outcomes
Commercial launch IP
Protection decided before you launch
Venture-ready IP
A position your next round can stand on
Exit-worthy IP
Portfolios that shine under diligence
Litigation-grade IP
Strength that settles disputes cleanly
Case studies
Fox Factory: textbook patent execution
View Case Study
Rockstar IP: don't hate the player
View Case Study
Overseas associates
Overseas associates
Overseas associate hub
Australian patent application procedure
Australian design application procedure
Australian trade mark application procedure
Practice news
Support and sufficiency in Australia aligning more with European norms
Excess claim fees in Australia from 1 October 2024
Grace period of 12 months from 10 March 2022 for Australian registered designs
Validity of Australian registered trade marks hinges on suitable ownership
Automotive
About
Where we work
Ballarat
PO Box 1858, Bakery Hill VIC 3354, Australia
Melbourne
The Commons, 55 Collins Street, Melbourne VIC 3000, Australia
Sydney
The Commons, 39 Martin Place, Sydney NSW 2000, Australia
Brisbane
Hub Australia, 200 Adelaide Street, Brisbane QLD 4000, Australia
Who we work for
Startups
The right advice at the right time
Corporate
Solutions that scale with you
Enterprise
Managing IP at scale
Our company
Ownership structure
Freedom to be clear and responsive
Founding principles
Established to deliver big-firm quality with bespoke execution
Corporate
Boutique scale, big-picture thinking
Company announcements
EUREKA turns five!
Hello world
Insights
Ideas, research and perspectives on intellectual property
Patents
·
Designs
·
Trade marks
Registered IP rights are the core of our business
Software patents
Navigating computer-implemented inventions
Startup IP strategy
Making the right decisions upfront
Portfolio building
Engineer your portfolio strategically
Automotive
Motorsport to marine, we share your enthusiasm
Overseas associates
Procedural details and substantive requirements
About
Who we are and our approach
Contact
Tell us what you’re building and we can advise
Software patenting trends across Australia, United States Europe
Article
Contact
Litigation-grade IP ends disputes on your terms
LITIGATION stRATEGY
Litigation strategy
is best served by a position which seeks to avoid challenge
The objective is to resolve conflict altogether simply as a consequence of the strength of your IP position.
Article
·
September 14, 2022
Litigation positions are built years before they are flexed
Enforcement value comes from accumulated rights that make competing expensive, rather than from any single patent tested in isolation.
LITIGATION-GRADE IP
Litigation-grade IP
Litigation-grade IP is built specifically for enforcement and, if necessary, the rigours of adversarial challenge. You want maximum flexibility and options, and a position that others are unlikely to argue against.
Technological innovation is protected by patents
Patents
Patents
Patents protect new inventions, with up to 20 years of exclusivity in exchange for publishing how the technology operates.
Product design is protected by registered designs
Designs
Registered designs
Registered designs protect new product designs in terms of visual appearance the product's shape and configuration.
Branding is protected by registered trade marks
Trade marks
Registered trade marks
Registered trade marks grant exclusive rights for your branding in connection with goods or services you offer to the market.
EXPERTISE
Founders come to us
at four key moments
Each moment calls for a conversation and a decision. We map the moment to the right strategy. And tell you plainly where protection adds nothing.
IP priorities over the commercial lifecycle
Article
01
You are building something valuable and are about to launch
Pre-disclosure strategy, freedom-to-operate, and a filing approach that survives technical diligence later.
COMMERCIAL LAUNCH IP
02
You are raising and the term sheet hinges on the IP holding
A venture-ready audit that turns "patents pending" into a position an investor's counsel can verify.
VENTURE-READY IP
03
You are acquiring, being acquired, or licensing technology
Diligence that interrogates ownership and validity, not just the paperwork most data rooms accept.
EXIT-WORTHY IP
04
You are stopping someone copying your product or your brand
Coordinated enforcement across patents, designs and registered trade marks that is proportionate and quick.
litigation-grade IP
litigation-grade IP FAQ
Your questions, answered with clarity
What does enforcement cost, and how long does it take?
Australian patent proceedings routinely reach six figures well before trial, and a contested matter taken to judgment runs considerably higher and typically takes two to three years. Those numbers are the reason strength matters commercially: they apply to your opponent as well, and a position they cannot cheaply attack makes early resolution the rational choice for them.
Why would we keep a divisional application pending?
Because pending claims can still be shaped. While a divisional remains alive, you retain the ability to pursue claims directed at an infringement that appeared after the original filing, which is the nearest thing to a second chance the system offers. It also creates uncertainty a competitor cannot price, since they cannot know what the eventual claims will cover.
We have been accused of infringing. What now?
Do not respond substantively before the claim is assessed. Check whether the asserted right is valid, whether it actually covers what you sell, whether the party asserting it owns it, and whether the letter itself constitutes an unjustified threat. Many assertions weaken considerably under examination, and the reply you send early will shape everything that follows.
A competitor has launched a copy. What should we do first?
Establish the position before making contact. That means confirming ownership and title, mapping the claims against their actual product, assessing the strongest validity attack they could run, and identifying every right in play rather than only the obvious patent. This usually takes weeks rather than months, and it determines whether the first letter creates leverage or creates liability.
How many rights do we need before a competitor takes notice?
Fewer than most people assume, provided they layer. What matters is the number of separate arguments a competitor must win, not the number of cases filed. Two patents covering different aspects of the product, a registered design, and a registered mark create four distinct problems under four bodies of law. Ten patents covering variations of one idea create roughly one.
Can we stop copies at the border?
For trade marks and copyright, yes. A Notice of Objection lodged with Australian Border Force allows Customs to seize infringing imports, which stops goods reaching the market without any court proceeding. Patents and registered designs are not covered by that scheme. It is one of the clearest practical reasons to hold registered marks alongside technical rights.
Can we get an injunction quickly?
Interlocutory injunctions are available, but they are demanding. You need a sufficiently strong case, a persuasive argument that damages would not be an adequate remedy, and you must give an undertaking to compensate the other side if you ultimately lose. That undertaking is a real financial exposure. Speed is available to parties whose position is already documented and ready to present.
What happens to our patent if we sue someone?
It goes on trial alongside their product. An infringement action invites a revocation counterclaim, so the defendant gains both a defence and a weapon. Their advisers will search prior art the examiner never found and read every prosecution amendment for admissions about what the claims do not cover. Grant is not a finding of validity, it is an opinion formed under time pressure.
Can we send a cease and desist letter ourselves?
It's the point at which most self-managed enforcement goes wrong. Australian law gives the recipient of an unjustified threat a cause of action against the party who made it, with remedies including an injunction and damages. Merely notifying someone that a patent exists is treated differently from threatening proceedings, and the line between them is not intuitive. Get the position assessed before anything is sent.
Do we have to sue to get value from our patents?
No, and most value never involves proceedings. Rights work primarily by changing what competitors decide to build, and then by shaping negotiations when someone proceeds anyway. Litigation is the visible tail of a much larger effect. A portfolio that is never asserted has usually done its job, which is also why its contribution is easy to overlook at budget time.
Is a registered design easier to enforce than a patent?
Often, yes. The comparison is visual rather than technical, which makes infringement quicker and cheaper to demonstrate, and the validity attack surface is narrower. Designs also fit the common case where a competitor copies how a product looks rather than how it works. The limitation is scope: a sufficiently different appearance avoids the right entirely.
Their process runs behind closed doors. Can we still enforce?
Only if you can prove what is happening inside, which is why this is a drafting problem rather than a litigation one. Claims directed to a manufacturing process or a server-side method may be perfectly valid and impossible to evidence. Where proof is difficult, the useful claim is usually directed at what the customer receives, and that choice has to be made years earlier.
PORTFOLIO APPROACH
Litigation strategy
should be anticipated when portfolio building
How do you approach building your portfolio when litigation is the norm in your competitive market?
Case Study
·
September 30, 2026
Peloton: riding under pressure
Thin hardware margins, low barriers to entry and obviousness-prone software claims: how Peloton's patents and litigation show what a subscription business can and cannot protect.
