Australia: Productivity Commission releases anti-IP report

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Cookies Settings

Australia: Productivity Commission releases anti-IP report

The Australian Productivity Commission has finalised the release of its lengthy report into the IP system.

The report appears to have been written by economists with little background in the operation of IP law and is driven by the imperative of providing IP rights at a minimal cost to society, rather than the need to embrace risk and experimentation by inventors and entrepreneurs.

To this end, the report seems to desire to minimise the extent and reach of IP rights, and includes such recommendations as abolishing the innovation patent system; introducing an objects clause to the Patents Act which is likely to provide fertile ground for litigants to test; severely curtailing the ability to obtain extensions of term for pharmaceutical patents; raising the inventive step requirements to the highest level that the Commission could find in use; and reworking renewal and patent office fees to limit the long-term viability of maintaining patent applications.

Interestingly, the Commission's previous position for the wholesale abolition of software patents has been excised from the report.

Unfortunately, it is likely the report may gain significant acceptance by the Australian government, leading to Australia adopting positions that are out of line with the global norm. This is unfortunate, as the report has the mark of the efficient market theorist, seeking to restrict the cost of IP rights to society as a prime imperative. The notion that inventors and entrepreneurs should be encouraged as highly valued members of modern society is sadly lacking.

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 SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Cabinet M Oproiu’s Raluca Vasilescu explains why AI is changing what clients expect from patent attorneys, where the technology is overhyped and what the next generation will need to do differently
As clients demand more flexible fees and AI-driven efficiencies, IP firms are rethinking pricing without abandoning the value of their work
HG Law was formed largely by ex Fish & Neave lawyers who left after the latter's merger with Ropes & Gray; now those experiences are shaping its latest combination
David Rodrigues and Evan Lazerowitz – attorneys at Robinson & Cole – offer practical guidance on the steps a business might consider to preserve and maximise IP value before entering financial distress or insolvency
Daniel Law CEO Alicia Daniel-Shores may have stepped into a family business, but she has spent two decades building her own vision around technology and litigation
Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
The IP boutique is betting that growing investment in quantum and semiconductors will fuel demand as technology shifts toward physical systems
Lawyers say the overhaul better reflects commercial reality, with changes spanning novelty searches, digital designs and access to a small claims track, but stopping short of criminalising unregistered design infringement
Carpmaels & Ransford hires its fourth partner of the year and wins access to UPC files, as fresh orders address costs, confidentiality and the use of divisional patents
Gift this article