IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Office of the Registry
Melbourne No M42 of 1990 B e t w e e n -
AUTODESK INC. and AUTODESK
AUSTRALIA PTY LTD
Appellants
and
MARTIN PATRICK DYASON,
CHRISTINE DYASON and PETERVINCENT KELLY
Respondents
Order
MASON CJ
BRENNAN J
DEANE J
DAWSON J
| Autodesk(4) | 1 | 21/4/93 |
TOOHEY J
GAUDRON J
McHUGH J
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
AT CANBERRA ON WEDNESDAY, 21 APRIL 1993, AT 10.16 AM
Copyright in the High Court of Australia
MASON CJ: Judgment in this matter was handed down on
12 February 1992, allowing the appeal.
Subsequently, the parties requested more specific orders but, before further orders were made, the
respondents sought to have the judgment and orders
of this Court vacated. Judgment in that
application was handed down on 3 March 1993,
dismissing the application and directing the
parties to bring in minutes of order in accordance
with the judgment in Autodesk Inc. v. Dyason {No.1]
(1992) 173 C.L.R. 330. The parties duly provided the Court with minutes of order with which, save
for one part of the order, they were in agreement.
The Court now makes the following orders.
Appeal allowed with costs.
Orders 1, 3 and 4 of the Full Court of the
Federal Court set aside and in lieu thereof order
that:
(1) order 1 of Northrop J. dated 15 September
1989 be varied by ordering that:
(a) Martin Patrick Dyason, Christine Dyason and Peter Vincent Kelly, and
each of them, whether by themselves,
their servants, agents or howsoever
otherwise, be restrained from -
(i) reproducing in any material form the whole, or a
substantial part, of the
computer program known as
"AutoCAD";
(ii) selling or letting for hire, or
by way of trade, offering, or
exposing for sale or hire, any
article, being a reproduction
of the whole, or a substantial
part, of the said computer program.
( b) Martin Patrick Dyason, Christine Dyason and Peter Vincent Kelly, and each of them, whether by themselves, their servants, agents or howsoever otherwise, be restrained from
reproducing in any material form thewhole, or a substantial part, of the
127-bit series look-up table in thesaid computer program and, more
particularly, in that part of thecomputer program known as "Widget C II.
| Autodesk(4) | 2 | 21/4/93 |
(2) the appeal to the Full Court of the
Federal Court by Martin Patrick Dyason,
Christine Dyason and Peter Vincent Kelly
be otherwise dismissed with costs.
Remit the matter to the Federal Court of
Australia, Victoria District Registry, for a directions hearing on a date to be fixed for
directions as to its further conduct.
AT 10.19 AM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED SINE DIE
| Autodesk(4) | 21/4/93 |
- AGLC
- Autodesk Inc & Anor v Dyason [1993] HCATrans 88
- Case
- [1993] HCATrans 88
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the High Court was to determine the precise terms of the orders to be made following its earlier decision allowing the appeal. This involved specifying the nature of the injunctions to be granted against the respondents, particularly concerning the reproduction and sale of a computer program and a specific component thereof known as the "127-bit series look-up table" within "Widget C II".
The High Court's reasoning, as indicated by the orders made, was to give effect to its prior judgment of 12 February 1992. The Court varied an earlier order of Northrop J. by imposing restraints on the respondents, prohibiting them from reproducing substantial parts of the computer program and from selling or offering for sale any reproduction of the whole or a substantial part of it. Furthermore, the respondents were restrained from reproducing the "127-bit series look-up table" and specifically that part of the program known as "Widget C II". The appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court was otherwise dismissed with costs, and the matter was remitted to the Federal Court for further directions.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.