The Patents Act 1990 establishes the basis of the patent system in Australia. Like other patent systems around the world, the grant of a patent is reliant on an alleged invention satisfying, among others, the criteria of novelty and non-obviousness.
It is a common perception that the threshold for patent grant is lower than those of Australia’s major trading partners. Indeed, according to the legal interpretation of the statues, the body in charge of the Australian patent system, IPAustralia, maintains a lower threshold of novelty and inventiveness compared to the United States Patent and Trademarks Office (USPTO) and the European Patent Office (EPO)[1]. However, a study by Jensen et al.[2] comparing grant rates of different patent offices finds the patentability threshold in Australia higher than that of the USPTO.
Nevertheless, the study by Jensen et al.[3] takes all elements of patentability into account, along with common law and patent office protocols. Working in this area, I note that an Australian application is usually granted more quickly for concurrent applications in different jurisdictions. It is my opinion, based on the documents cited during prosecution, that the Examining division in IPAustralia is not as thorough in scoping out the relevant documents. This might be due to a lack of resources that allows the examiners to understand the technology fully, which in turn result in a poorly prosecuted application.
On the other hand, the Examiners may be guided by the lower threshold of novelty and inventiveness according to interpretation of the legislation[4]. There are several problems with this lower novelty and inventiveness threshold imposed by the legislation. Unnecessarily broad patents ...
... middle of paper ...
...if the cited documents are reasonable, the applicant then have to show what is new or what “unexpected results” arise from the asserted claim, features of which, I think, should be patentable.
It is undeniable that the inventive threshold in the Australian patent system needs to be lifted, so perhaps the wording of “obvious to try” is necessary as it encapsulates the requirement that over simplistic combination of elements are not patentable. Nevertheless, it is my opinion that Australian Patent Office should adopt a clearly defined obviousness test. Australia, which primarily sources technology from overseas, needs the examination threshold to be comparable to other jurisdictions. A stronger patent system here will afford overseas investors the confidence to invest in Australia as they are ensured the intellectual property protection for their investment.
(7) Hall B. Patents and Patent Policy -. 2007. The 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the 'Secondary' of the Morse H. SETTLEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY DISPUTES IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL AND MEDICAL DEVICE INDUSTRIES: ANTITRUST RULES. Allison JR, Lemley MA, Moore KA, Trunkey RD. Valuable patents. Geol.
Since the dawn of time for a society to work it needs to have a level of structure that applies to everyone and is understood by everyone. Australian legal system is broad and complex. It is the nature of the encompassing laws and regulations which reflect how people, organisations and governments behave on the many different levels of operation and these are created to make sure that everyone understands their rights and obligations. There are two sources of Law in Australia: Statute Law regulated by Parliament and comprise of legislations and acts; and Judge-made Law or Common Law where decisions made by judges are based on previous cases.
Legal system is a comprehensive term that is used to confirm the existence of the law; it also explains the law-making process and how this is enforced on everyone. The Australian legal system regulates all level of governments, organisations, and all people whether they are Australian born or have migrated here, and they must obey Australia’s regulations. The legal system here was developed from the United Kingdom’s legal system, as Australia was a colony of the British. At a glance, the British government granted restricted rights to their colonies, including Australia to set local government system. This was intended to developed laws in local area, also to deal with specific situation at that time. As a result, the legal system in each of the colonies started to develop separately. According to Carvan J (2010) the Australian law is adopted from several sources, including the rules of equity, parliamentary laws, delegated legislations, judge-made laws, and international laws. (Austrlian Legal System, 2007)
In Australia, there are two systems for registration of interests in land; the general law and Torrens systems. Today, the Torrens system is used in every Australian jurisdiction, being introduced in Western Australia on 1 July 1875.
Although it is required to consider the common law rule, principles and to apply settled laws to new facts. The court is also restricted by different legal doctrines of precedent, separation of powers and the court is required to make Australia laws remain predictable and certain.
Australia was originally a collection of six independent colonies and due to many reasons discussed in this essay, they drew together and became a Federation. Although the States still retain their own identities, it is as Australian's that we are united and identified against the rest of the world. Australia has become a recognized nation with political and military standing.
and means “from the beginning”. This is not the name that the Aborigine people called
A copyright owner does not need to register an original work in Australia; the Copyright Act 1968 will automatically protect it, if it is expressed in material form. However, copyright does not exist in the idea itself (An introduction to copyright, 2012).
The average American can create their own business without government intervention. The U.S government protects large and small businesses, if it is required. The government protects intellectual property not just in the u.s, but also “…international intellectual property protection…” (uspto). With this in mind, Americans invent groundbreaking technological advances.
Since the knowledge was already in the public domain and the defendants had used such knowledge of the plaintiff, it was held that the defendants had not violated the claimants’ patent and were entitled to honestly use the existing knowledge in the public sphere. Nevertheless a company which comes out with a unique product through intensive research and development may seek to protect the right to its production through the protection guaranteed under the Patents Act
Competition law is actually the law that seeks or in fact promotes in maintain market competition through regulating Anti-competitive conduct from firms. Competition law is practices through private and public implementation. Thus, as mentioned by Whish & Bailey (2015), competition law is also called “anti-trust” law in European Union and United States, and in the form of anti-monopoly law in Russia and China. In preceding years, it is considered as “trade practice law” within Australia and United Kingdom .
“The Australian Government supports the appropriate use of technology in Australian schools to prepare students to learn, train and live in a digital world.” ( study in Australia) Why do they use the technology you ask? They use technology in schools to help prepare the students for the world that they live in today, because everyone has at least a computer or and phone of some sort.
...ividuals and systems should be developed to encourage innovation in a flexible way with few legal restrictions. Government and investors should work towards improving the infrastructure of the nation by providing facilities and platforms making it simple for any individual to innovate.
Patents claims focus of the mechanism, principles and components surrounding those ideas. Patents are the strongest of the law to protect the intellectual property. Patent law is based on a very strict liability standard, making a business owner’s strongest option for intellectual property protection. Patents often make use of reverse engineering. Through reverse engineering, they see if patented inventions are in used by another company. Patents have an expiration date; the design patent protect design, shape, configuration and appearance of any invention for 14 years, and utility patents that protect functional makeover and new invention last for 20