The fine ‘fair
dealing’ line between
freedom of speech and
infringement Inspire September 2021
The Federal Court has recently issued a decision in AGL Energy
v Greenpeace Australia Pacific 1 , holding that the use of another
person’s logo for parody or satirical purposes does not constitute
copyright or trade mark infringement, but only if that use is
a ‘fair dealing’. This decision was the result of an urgent action
brought by AGL against Greenpeace Australia in relation to
an advertising campaign which used AGL’s corporate logo.

10 On 5 May 2021, Greenpeace
launched a campaign about AGL,
a major provider of energy services
in Australia, across several media
platforms. An example of their
banner is shown at right.

AGL made it clear that it did not
seek to stop or prevent Greenpeace
from engaging in such a campaign.

What AGL did take issue with was
Greenpeace’s use of a modified version
of AGL’s logo (below left) in their
campaign, that combined the logo
with the tagline, ‘Australia’s Greatest
Liability’ (below right), which was a play
on AGL’s initials.

AGL took action against Greenpeace on
two main grounds under the Copyright
Act 1968 (Cth) and the Trade Marks Act
1995 (Cth). AGL claimed that:
1. Greenpeace had infringed
AGL’s copyright subsisting
in the AGL Logo; and
2. Greenpeace had infringed AGL’s
registered trade mark 1843098 for
the AGL Logo as the Modified AGL
Logo was substantially identical
with the AGL Logo and use was
in relation to the same services
covered by this registration.

1 AGL Energy Limited v Greenpeace Australia Pacific Limited [2021] FCA 625 (8 June 2021).