What this is
Why the court refused an injunction in the 2017 Australian Redbubble case: the evidence did not show a threat of repeated infringement, and Redbubble had changed its programme.
How it’s built
- Read from the Federal Court of Australia judgment of December 2017.
What we assumed
Nothing. The figure is used as published.
Sanity check
The court also found the injunction as drafted did not fit a case of authorising infringement, so the refusal says little about the merits.
Where it comes from
Pokémon Company International, Inc. v Redbubble Ltd [2017] FCA 1541 Federal Court of Australia (via AustLII, Wayback copy 2025-12-04) · 19 December 2017 Open the original ↗
The line in the source
the evidence in this proceeding has not established the threat of repeated infringement if the conduct were found to have infringed TPCi’s rights.