Carrot Puff Copycat: Copyright Infringed in Federal Court of Australia Case
.tmb-cfthumb_fb.png?Culture=en&sfvrsn=464e5e00_1)
As reported by Mason Hayes & Curran, the Federal Court of Australia has reportedly found the supermarket chain, Aldi, liable for copyright infringement regarding illustrations used on the packaging of children’s food products.
The case involved Aldi’s house brand, MAMIA, which it reportedly admitted was designed to look like another brand, BELLIES. In 2019, when Aldi underwent a redesign of the packaging for the MAMIA brand, it reportedly instructed a design company to use BELLIES as a benchmark. As the below photo illustrates, the new MAMIA packaging was similar to BELLIES.

The Australian court concluded that it was likely Aldi had drawn inspiration for the MAMIA designs from the BELLIES packaging. This was inferred from the following similarities: a small, oval-shaped cartoon character with a light-coloured belly, a solid white background, a two-column layout, a rounded, childlike font, and a number in the upper-right corner, among others.
The decision found that these layout and design elements involved a degree of “creativity or originality”, and they “go beyond an idea or concept and constitute a form of expression”. The court was ultimately satisfied that Aldi “ought reasonably to have known that the making of the relevant articles constituted an infringement of the copyright in the Applicant’s Puff Works”.
Authors: Emily Groper and Annie MacKinnon
Photo Credit: istock.com/Jacob Wackerhausen
Authors
Expertise
Insights
-
Intellectual Property Litigation
Carrot Puff Copycat: Copyright Infringed in Federal Court of Australia Case
As reported by Mason Hayes & Curran, the Federal Court of Australia has reportedly found the supermarket chain, Aldi, liable for copyright infringement regarding illustrations used on the… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Carnegie Hall Takes Trademark Center Stage in Legal Battle
Carnegie Hall has reportedly commenced an action against Carnegie Diner and Café for trademark infringement.In its complaint filed with the United States District Court, Southern District of New York… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Federal Court of Appeal Reiterates Permissive Approach to Granting Leave to Amend Defective Pleadings
In Bell Canada et al. v. Millennium Funding, Inc. et al., 2025 FCA 153, Bell Canada and Bell Aliant (collectively, “Bell”) appealed an order granting the Respondents’ (collectively, “Millenium… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Under the Radar, Over the Counter: Goyard's Quiet Battle Against Fake Luxury
Goyard, the Parisian brand established in 1853 and still privately owned, has reportedly faced a surge in counterfeit bags flooding the market. The company refrains from advertising, avoids e-commerce… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Music to Sheeran’s Ears: Supreme Court Declines to Rehear Marvin Gaye Copyright Suit
The US Supreme Court has declined to revisit a copyright dispute over alleged similarities between Ed Sheeran’s 2014 hit, “Thinking Out Loud”, and Marvin Gaye’s 1973 classic, “Let’s Get It On… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Federal Court Reaffirms Importance of Viva Voce Testimony
In McCain Foods Limited v. J.R. Simplot Company 2024 FC 1729, the Federal Court considered the circumstances in which an examination for discovery of a person, other than a person examined under Rule…