Krispy Kreme should stop selling its Iced Dough-Vo donut?

Last time, we discussed about Krispy Kreme being in donut war over its recipe and also Pirate Bay's copyright infringement. Both of them were about the same issue, Copyright.

After looking up my country's law, I found that it is different in each country. So if we want to know whether or not something illegal is, we need to check the country's copy law.

Actually, I don't know what Australia's copy law is.
If a war of word starts between Krispy Kreme and Arnott in my country, what will be the future developments of the affair?

Similarly, last year, famous italian restaurant 'Mad for garlic' in Korea was in trouble because a different restaurant which was located in Jeon-buk, was selling a garlic Pizza which was similar to 'Mad for garlic' Pizza. It was almost identical to Mad for Garlic pizza in recipe. It also looked similar with its garlic topping. 'Mad for garlic' applied for a court injunction and then Korea court ruled in favor of 'Mad for garlic' and said "We concluded the cause of the resaurant's operating profit is the garlic recipe."

Back to my question, if a war of word started between Krispy Kreme and Arnotts in my country, Koreans could try the donuts and cookies, and the Korean court concluded that the recipe was important for selling the products, they would rule in favor of Anortt. Also, I would agree.

Therefore, I think that the first most important thing after making a menu or something is obtaining a patent on technical know-how, trademark right and registering it for the menus and recipes.

[e-mail]

Related to the article,
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25408164-5013511,00.html