Career Step, LLC v TalentMed Pty Ltd (No 2)

Career Step, LLC, the applicant, brought an action against TalentMed Pty Ltd, the first respondent, and two of its directors, the second and third respondents, in the Federal Court. The applicant claimed that the first respondent had infringed its copyright by copying parts of the applicant's electronic educational course materials to create its own competing course materials. The applicant also claimed that the second and third respondents authorised the copying or were joint tortfeasors in the civil wrong of the first respondent. The applicant further claimed that the first respondent had breached the terms of a contract between the parties by using confidential information other than for the purpose of sales and marketing of the course without prior written consent.

The court had to decide whether the applicant's course was a copyright work and whether the applicant was its owner. The court also had to determine whether the first respondent copied parts of the applicant's course in its version 1 and version 2, and if so, whether the amount copied was generic or a substantial part of the work. Additionally, the court had to decide whether either of the second and third respondents authorised the copying or was a joint tortfeasor in the civil wrong of the first respondent. The court had to interpret the terms of the contract between the parties and determine whether the first respondent breached the contract by using confidential information other than for the purpose of sales and marketing of the course without prior written consent.

The court found that the applicant's course was a copyright work and that the applicant was its owner. The court also found that the first respondent copied parts of the applicant's course in both version 1 and version 2 to create its own competing course materials. However, the court found that the amount copied was generic and not a substantial part of the work. The court further found that neither of the second and third respondents authorised the copying or was a joint tortfeasor in the civil wrong of the first respondent. The court also found that the first respondent breached the terms of the contract between the parties by using confidential information other than for the purpose of sales and marketing of the course without prior written consent.

The court ordered the parties to bring in, within 14 days, agreed minutes of order to give effect to these reasons. The court also ordered that the minutes of order are to deal with the question of costs and with the conduct of the balance of these proceedings. If the parties were unable to agree on the orders to be made, each side should file and serve their competing versions within the same period, that is, within 14 days. The proceedings were listed for case management at 9:30 AM on 28 March 2018.