find the latest legal job
Corporate and Commercial Partner
Category: Corporate and Commercial Law | Location: Adelaide SA 5000
· Full time · Join a leading Adelaide commercial law firm
View details
In-house Legal Counsel & Commercial Lawyers
Category: Corporate and Commercial Law | Location: All Sydney NSW
· Providing lawyers with flexibility and control over when they work, how they work and who they work for.
View details
In-house Legal Counsel & Commercial Lawyers
Category: Corporate and Commercial Law | Location: All Melbourne VIC
· Providing lawyers with flexibility and control over when they work, how they work and who they work for.
View details
Legal Inhouse / Lawyer / Company Secretary
Category: Other | Location: Brisbane QLD 4000
· Fantastic Company · Potential to be Part Time / Flexible Work Pattern
View details
Part Time Risk & Compliance Officer
Category: Other | Location: Brisbane QLD 4000
· Brisbane City · Flexible Part Time Hours
View details
'Anti-IP initiatives' slammed by firm

'Anti-IP initiatives' slammed by firm

Proposals to reform Australia’s intellectual property scheme contradict the government’s innovation agenda and sell out the national interest for short-term consumer gains, according to Shelston IP. 

Responding to the Productivity Commission’s draft report on IP Arrangements in Australia, Shelston IP patent attorney Jack Redfern said the proposed measures undermined the rights of IP holders.

It seems the Commission is taking the attitude that Australians cannot compete and should just take what they can, while they can, from those who do innovate,” Mr Redfern said.

“Undermining the rights of IP holders may result in reduced costs to consumers in the short-term, but will come at a cost to the country in the medium to longer term. Rather than being tempted by the allure of short-term gain, our collective efforts should be tackling the more challenging option of making Australia a net exporter of IP,” he said.

Shelston IP has made a submission to the Productivity Commission in response to the draft report, which identifies 10 recommendations it describes as “anti-IP initiatives”.

Mr Redfern warned that implementation of these recommendations will hinder Australia’s entrepreneurs and investors. He also believes they contradict the National Innovation and Science Agenda.

Flagging a particular proposal to remove patents for software-related inventions, he said: “The absence of patents [which] support local software developers raise funds from investors will either stifle or stop the development, or simply impart further incentive to undertake the development in the US or another country where patent protection is available.”

He added: “The Commission’s reasoning ignores the fact that it is entrepreneurs and investors, not the government, that commercialise innovations produced by our local software developers.”

The IP lawyer is so critical of the recommendations that he has dubbed the Productivity Commission’s interim publication as the ‘anti-intellectual property draft report’In his view, boosting the international competitiveness of local innovators, who range from small business to universities, cannot be achieved by curtailing the rights of IP holders.

“There are plenty of Australian software companies doing the hard slog to develop valuable products here in Australia for local use and export,” Mr Redfern said.

“Political leaders of all persuasions have consistently demonstrated that they understand the need for Australians to innovate and compete, not to give up. And yet we have the Commission recommending that one of the key supports for our innovative digital future be taken away, which is completely at odds with the government’s innovation and science agenda policy imperatives.”

“We can choose to be lazy and effectively ignore IP, or we can choose to compete with other countries to generate and protect our IP,” Mr Redfern added.

The Law Council of Australia also underscored the dangers posed by IP policies that handcuff innovators’ interests.

The group described the approach endorsed by the draft recommendation as one that “subjugates the interests of Australian innovators seeking to protect intellectual property in Australia (and elsewhere)”.

The Law Council went on to warn that the long-term consequence of abolishing patents for software and business methods would be a detrimental effect on global innovation or “lead to increasingly prescriptive treaties and trade agreements as a condition of trade in the goods and services which Australia wishes to export”.

The Productivity Commission is expected to release its final report later this year.

Like this story? Read more:

QLS condemns actions of disgraced lawyer as ‘stain on the profession’

NSW proposes big justice reforms to target risk of reoffending

The legal budget breakdown 2017

'Anti-IP initiatives' slammed by firm
lawyersweekly logo
Promoted content
Recommended by Spike Native Network
more from lawyers weekly
Nov 23 2017
Education a passion for YL president
Promoted by University of Melbourne. Melbourne Law Masters student Phoebe Blank is successfully j...
Nov 23 2017
Anti-radicalisation programs playing ‘second fiddle’ to terrorism laws
Several academics have questioned the balance between Australia’s counterterrorism legislation and...
 William Ah Ket
Nov 23 2017
‘Bamboo ceiling’ thought piece wins inaugural law prize
A paper that explores the idea of affirmative action to achieve greater diversity among members of A...
Allens managing partner Richard Spurio, image courtesy Allens' website
Jun 21 2017
Promo season at Allens
A group of lawyers at Allens have received promotions across its PNG and Australian offices. ...
May 11 2017
Partner exits for in-house role
A Victorian lawyer has left the partnership of a national firm to start a new gig with state governm...
Esteban Gomez
May 11 2017
National firm recruits ‘major asset’
A national law firm has announced it has appointed a new corporate partner who brings over 15 years'...
Nicole Rich
May 16 2017
Access to justice for young transgender Australians
Reform is looming for the process that young transgender Australians and their families must current...
Geoff Roberson
May 11 2017
The lighter side of the law: when law and comedy collide
On the face of it, there doesn’t seem to be much that is amusing about the law, writes Geoff Rober...
May 10 2017
Advocate’s immunity – without fear or without favour but not both
On 29 March 2017, the High Court handed down its decision in David Kendirjian v Eugene Lepore & ...