Reading Time: 2 minutes

Some readers may not have considered the importance of protecting the IP properties of currency. I mean, who would even think of copying the iconic caribou from the Canadian quarter?

Coin parent

However, currency manufacturers like the Royal Canadian Mint are commercial enterprises, and contracts for foreign circulation can be very lucrative. Any diminishing of a currency’s brand can have serious impacts on their bottom line.

A recent dispute between the Royal Canadian Mint and the Royal Australian Mint illustrates the lengths at which currency manufacturers are willing to go to protect their brand.

Background

The dispute began when the Royal Australian Mint issued special coloured $2 coins to commemorate Remembrance Day and Anzac Day.

In response, the Royal Canadian Mint sued the Royal Australian Mint, arguing that the printing method used to colour the coins was patented by the Canadian Mint, with the patent granted in 2013. This method has been used to colour a number of Canadian coins, including the 25 cent Poppy Coin. The Canadian Mint demanded that all of the coloured Australian coins in circulation, around 500,000, be destroyed.

In a statement, Canadian Mint spokesperson Alex Reeves said: “The Mint distinguishes itself in the global marketplace with its cutting-edge coin technologies. Our technologies are vital to maintaining our competitive standing, and the Mint undertakes all steps necessary to protect its intellectual property rights.”

The Royal Australian Mint’s position was that their method of colouring the coins was sufficiently different so as not to infringe the Canadian Mint’s patent. They also argued that the original 2006 patent application by Canada shouldn’t have been granted, as it wasn’t novel enough.

Then, in August 2017, the Australian Mint launched three commemorative designs for their $2 coin, celebrating the publication of Possum Magic by Mem Fox, a book many Australian kids (including myself) grew up with. The coins featured “magic dust” rings, which were created using a unique coin-colouring process.

The Canadian Mint expanded the claim to include the Possum Magic coins.

Collaborative agreement

After years of back-and-forth, earlier this month the two mints reached an out-of-court agreement.

The collaborative agreement puts an end to the dispute, and provides for “an exchange of licenses, and allows both mints to pursue their respective activities and business interests in a mutually-beneficial manner.”

Without a doubt, it is important to protect your brand and your patents. However, as this case demonstrates, there are times when collaboration can be more profitable than competition.

For more information about patents, contact our Intellectual Property Group.

Author(s)

This content is not intended to provide legal advice or opinion as neither can be given without reference to specific events and situations. © 2021 Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP.

Have Questions?

Enjoy this article?
Don’t forget to share.
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on email

Related Posts

Intellectual Property Law
Blog
Reading time: 2 mins
Trademark 101 – How do I make sure my preferred business name is not taken?
While it is stressful for many people going through this COVID-19 pandemic, and lockdown forcing many of us to work from[...]
Intellectual Property Law
Blog
Reading time: 2 mins
Patent 101 - I want to protect my invention. Where or how do I start?
You come up with an invention, and you want to protect your invention. So, where do you start?  There are[...]
Intellectual Property Law
Blog
Reading time: 2 mins
Trademark 101 – How do pick a good name for my business?
It is often very difficult, and it takes enormous effort to come up with a good business name, and when you[...]