White SW Computer Law
Intellectual Property, Information Technology & Telecommunications Lawyers
Melbourne Office - PO Box 452, COLLINS STREET WEST Victoria 8007 Australia
Sydney Office - GPO Box 2506, SYDNEY New South Wales 2001 Australia
Telephone: Melbourne Office - +61 3 9629 3709 Sydney Office - +61 2 9233 2600
Facsimile: Melbourne Office - +61 3 9629 3217 Sydney Office - +61 2 9233 3044
Email: wcl@computerlaw.com.au Internet: http://www.computerlaw.com.au

User Tools

Site Tools


nlsep04

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Next revision
Previous revision
nlsep04 [2011/02/14 18:25]
127.0.0.1 external edit
nlsep04 [2017/07/30 18:03] (current)
Line 1: Line 1:
 ====== White SW Computer Law Intellectual Property, Information Technology & Telecommunications Newsletter September 2004 ====== ====== White SW Computer Law Intellectual Property, Information Technology & Telecommunications Newsletter September 2004 ======
-===== TERMINATION OF EXCLUSIVE SOFTWARE LICENSING AGREEMENTS ​=====+===== Termination of exclusive Software License Agreements  ​=====
 The Federal Court matter of //​[[case_links#​Quanta Software International v Quanta Systems Ltd|Quanta Software International v Quanta Systems Ltd]] // [2004] FCA 1182 was decided this month. It involved a dispute between an Australian company ( "​Quanta Software"​ ) which had been granted an exclusive perpetual licence to use, copy, publish, translate and sub-licence rights in "​Eunice"​ software, in al countries except New Zealand and the New Zealand corporation ( "​Quanta Systems ") who was the copyright owner for that software. The Federal Court matter of //​[[case_links#​Quanta Software International v Quanta Systems Ltd|Quanta Software International v Quanta Systems Ltd]] // [2004] FCA 1182 was decided this month. It involved a dispute between an Australian company ( "​Quanta Software"​ ) which had been granted an exclusive perpetual licence to use, copy, publish, translate and sub-licence rights in "​Eunice"​ software, in al countries except New Zealand and the New Zealand corporation ( "​Quanta Systems ") who was the copyright owner for that software.
  
Line 21: Line 21:
 One thing that the case highlights is the importance of good consistent correspondence and making contemporaneous notes of meetings and discussions to be used as evidence, should the need arise. Wherever possible, these notes should be confirmed in a letter or another document supplied to the other parties present, soon after the meeting or discussion took place. Written contemporaneous notes will often hold greater weight than the oral testimony of a witness years after the event in question, as you cannot usually expect a witness to have perfect recall of what was said and done years earlier. One thing that the case highlights is the importance of good consistent correspondence and making contemporaneous notes of meetings and discussions to be used as evidence, should the need arise. Wherever possible, these notes should be confirmed in a letter or another document supplied to the other parties present, soon after the meeting or discussion took place. Written contemporaneous notes will often hold greater weight than the oral testimony of a witness years after the event in question, as you cannot usually expect a witness to have perfect recall of what was said and done years earlier.
  
-This article is a guide only and should not be used as a substitute for proper legal advice, readers should make their own enquiries and seek appropriate legal advice. 
  

  © White SW Computer Law 1994-2019. ABN 94 669 684 644. All Rights Reserved.
  Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation
  This website is a guide only and should not be used as a substitute for proper legal advice.
  Readers should make their own enquiries and seek appropriate legal advice.
  For legal advice please email wcl@computerlaw.com.au