Australia: Patents Office introducing amendments to Stifle Patents
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Australia: Patents Office introducing amendments to Stifle Patents

IP Australia is proceeding at pace with implementing the Government's response to the Productivity Commission's Report to severely curtail the rights of patent holders.

The proposed legislation and implementation is directed at the introduction of a number of problematic changes:

1) The abolition of the Innovation Patent system. The Innovation Patent system included a lower level inventiveness threshold similar to the Utility Model System of Germany, China and other countries. Allowing for lower inventiveness patents was deemed undesirable by the Productivity Commission and they recommended abolition. It is now important for applicants to seriously consider filing innovation patents before the repeal legislation is enacted.

2) Raising the inventive step requirements, somewhere in excess of the test of the European Patent Office, as a further restriction on grant. This is directed at increasing the hurdle requirement for grant.

3) Requiring applicants to disclose the "technical features" of their invention. This is an attempt to codify in legislation the European precedent of technical features. No doubt this will cause an excessive extra layer of unnecessary work for applicants.

4) Introducing an objects clause to the Patents Act 1990. Whilst the proposed clause is ephemeral, the likely subsequent discussion by patent litigants will increase the burden of litigation.

5) Making it easier to invoke the Crown Use provisions or Compulsory Licensing provisions. Again, restricting the rights of patent holders to fully exploit their patented inventions.

Whilst the Patents Office is conducting some public consultation, it is highly likely the Office will proceed with each of the above proposals.

Peter Treloar

Shelston IP

Level 21, 60 Margaret Street

Sydney NSW 2000, Australia

Tel: +61 2 9777 1111

Fax: +61 2 9241 4666

email@shelstonip.com

www.shelstonip.com

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Justin Davidson and Stanley Ng of Norton Rose Fulbright discuss what China’s recent Ultraman ruling does and doesn’t say about who is responsible when an AI system infringes copyright
Former in-house counsel reveal how consultancy work helped them win new business and how they cut through the stigma surrounding the job title
In-house counsel discuss the law firm billing practices that will win them over and the ones that drive them away
If the deal goes through, one group will manage more than 50% of patent filings in Australia and employ more than a quarter of patent attorneys in Australia and New Zealand
Siegmund Gutman, former chair of the life sciences patent group at Proskauer, is among a group of 10 lawyers to join Mintz Levin
A patent dispute between two manufacturing companies has shown that teething problems with the UPC’s case management system have not abated
Lawyers weigh in on the USPTO’s request for comment on the effects of AI on prior art analysis and obviousness determinations
A vast majority of corporates – especially smaller businesses – rely on a trusted referral when instructing external counsel, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 in-house counsel
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
The Munich Regional Court ruled that Lenovo was an unwilling licensee and had engaged in ‘holdout’ tactics
Gift this article