Canadian Mint sues Australia
Crown corporation says $2 coin infringed on its protected patent
OTTAWA — The Royal Canadian Mint is suing its Australian counterpart over the way it prints red poppies on its commemorative Remembrance Day coins.
Documents filed in Australia’s Federal Court in December allege The Royal Australian Mint used without permission a printing method patented by the Canadian mint — which is now demanding Australia’s 500,000 commemorative $2 coins, in circulation since 2012, either be turned over to them or “destroy(ed) under supervision.”
“It has become necessary for us to institute infringement proceedings to protect and preserve our intellectual property rights,” Canadian mint spokesman Alex Reeves said in a statement. “The Mint distinguishes itself in the global marketplace with its cutting-edge coin technologies.”
The court filings are dated Dec. 22, 2017. While the Royal Canadian Mint is a Crown corporation allowed to sue other parties with its corporate name, the Royal Australian Mint is part of the Australian government — so the respondent in the case is the Commonwealth of Australia.
According to a statement to court outlining steps taken to resolve the dispute, the Royal Canadian Mint first contacted its Australian counterpart two years earlier to notify them of the existence of a patent on printing technology. The Australians replied that they felt their methods were “sufficiently different to have not infringed.”
Over two years the parties tried discussing the matter with a meeting, several phone calls and several letters, but there was no resolution.
The Canadian mint first applied for a patent on a “method of printing an image on a metallic surface, particularly on a coin surface” in 2006. The patent was open for public inspection from 2007 and granted in 2013.
The applicants say they are aware of “infringing” Australian coins printed with coloured ink “by forming a plurality of macropores of about 0.1 to about 0.5 mm across in a designated pattern on a portion of the metal surface, forming a plurality of micropores within the macropores, cleaning the surface, applying the ink and drying the ink.”
Asked how the Canadian mint is sure the same printing method was used, Reeves said, “There was an examination. I can’t really add anything else at this time.”
Not only does the Canadian mint want to retrieve or see destroyed $2 million worth of Australian coins, they are asking the Australian mint be permanently restrained from infringing the patent and from “making, selling, supplying or otherwise disposing of, using or keeping the infringing coins” without licence or authority, to admit they infringed the patent, to hand over or destroy all advertising and promotional materials related to the coins, and to either surrender profits or pay damages.
Both businesses are competitive commercial operations that seek contracts in other countries. A 2016 annual report from the Canadian mint states its foreign circulation business had risen 33 per cent over 2015, with revenue of $63.1 million.
A first case management hearing is set for Feb. 7. A representative of the Royal Australian Mint did not respond to requests for comment.