<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>LawFont.com &#187; Patent</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lawfont.com/category/ip/patent/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lawfont.com</link>
	<description>an analysis of law, technology, economics, and policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:57:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>IP Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Bill &#8211; the whole kit and caboodle all in one exciting bill</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/04/01/1013/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/04/01/1013/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 23:32:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trade Mark]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=1013</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At an IP Academics’ conference in early February, I remember Professor Di Nicol asking, rhetorically, ‘where has all the patent reform gone?’. Di pointed out that we’d had any number of ACIP Reports, ALRC Reports (like that on Gene Patenting), and IP Australia Discussion Papers, all with no actual legislation resulting. No more, it seems. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/04/01/1013/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IP Australia &#8211; raising the bar?</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/03/03/ip-australia-raising-the-bar/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/03/03/ip-australia-raising-the-bar/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2011 22:46:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trade Mark]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=961</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[IP Australia has released the IP Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Bill for public consultation. It&#8217;s huge: it covers patentability standards, a patent research exception; enforcement; oppositions &#8211; you name it, it&#8217;s in there. Written submissions due by 14 April 2011. More thoughts to come&#8230;]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2011/03/03/ip-australia-raising-the-bar/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Manufacturing Generic Pharmaceuticals in Australia?</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2009/04/30/manufacturing-generic-pharmaceuticals-in-australia/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2009/04/30/manufacturing-generic-pharmaceuticals-in-australia/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 23:37:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=777</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I was interested, the other day, to see this Online Opinion article by Nick Gruen (Club Troppo) on Australia&#8217;s pharmaceutical industry and the idea of manufacturing generics for export. The basic point of in Nick&#8217;s post is that investment in the manufacture of generic biologics in Australia is being prevented by Australian patent law and [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2009/04/30/manufacturing-generic-pharmaceuticals-in-australia/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>This is interesting news: CSIRO wins settlement of wifi patent case in US</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2009/04/23/this-is-interesting-news-csiro-wins-settlement-of-wifi-patent-case-in-us/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2009/04/23/this-is-interesting-news-csiro-wins-settlement-of-wifi-patent-case-in-us/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 02:09:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=774</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[SMH has the story here.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2009/04/23/this-is-interesting-news-csiro-wins-settlement-of-wifi-patent-case-in-us/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another IP Reform Review!</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2009/03/30/another-ip-reform-review/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2009/03/30/another-ip-reform-review/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 05:45:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/?p=762</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Senator Kim Carr, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, today called for written submissions on proposed reforms to Australia&#8217;s intellectual property (IP) system. A strong and efficient IP system is a cornerstone of successful innovation. The proposed reforms are designed to help Australian innovators take their inventions to a global marketplace and encourage foreign [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2009/03/30/another-ip-reform-review/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Patent term extensions</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/03/20/patent-term-extensions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/03/20/patent-term-extensions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 23:07:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2008/03/20/patent-term-extensions/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I could never work out why the US Free Trade Agreements included a provision on patent term extension for &#8216;unreasonable delays&#8217; in the patent office (see, eg, Australia-US Free Trade Agreement Art 17.9.8). I figured there must be delays in some of the developing world countries they negotiate with. Now I understand why &#8211; according [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/03/20/patent-term-extensions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New and interesting Patent Stats comparing USPTO, JPO, EPO and Australian Patent Office</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/29/new-and-interesting-patent-stats-comparing-uspto-jpo-epo-and-australian-patent-office/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/29/new-and-interesting-patent-stats-comparing-uspto-jpo-epo-and-australian-patent-office/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:08:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/29/new-and-interesting-patent-stats-comparing-uspto-jpo-epo-and-australian-patent-office/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some colleagues of mine (Paul H. Jensen, Alfons Palangkaraya and Elizabeth Webster), from the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, have published a new Working Paper that would be of interest to people who, like me, are fascinated by international dynamics in patenting. The paper is called &#8216;Application pendency times and outcomes across [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2008/02/29/new-and-interesting-patent-stats-comparing-uspto-jpo-epo-and-australian-patent-office/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A compendium of patent office cooperation &#8211; and some thoughts [updated]</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/29/a-compendium-of-patent-office-cooperation-and-some-thoughts/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/29/a-compendium-of-patent-office-cooperation-and-some-thoughts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2007 07:10:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/29/a-compendium-of-patent-office-cooperation-and-some-thoughts/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve become more interested in copyright bureaucracies, and patent and trade mark offices: how they operate; how transparent they are; who they are; how powers are divided between them; how they interact; how they characterise their role, their &#8216;customers&#8217;, and their &#8216;stakeholders&#8217;. How we make them accountable for the decisions they make &#8211; or how [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/29/a-compendium-of-patent-office-cooperation-and-some-thoughts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IP Australia wants to be your Office of Choice [updated and expanded - again!]</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/18/ip-australia-wants-to-be-your-office-of-choice/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/18/ip-australia-wants-to-be-your-office-of-choice/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 06:30:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/18/ip-australia-wants-to-be-your-office-of-choice/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Australia&#8217;s Patent Office, known as IP Australia, has launched its &#8220;Strategic Statement&#8221; for the period 2007-2012. Like all these things, it&#8217;s a bit boring and all motherhood-statement-y &#8211; as, indeed, one would expect. But a couple of things about the Strategic Statement are notable. In particular, it explicitly states its &#8216;vision&#8217;: basically, it sees itself [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/10/18/ip-australia-wants-to-be-your-office-of-choice/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Remember when patent evergreening was being debated in Parliament?</title>
		<link>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/06/20/remember-when-patent-evergreening-was-being-debated-in-parliament/</link>
		<comments>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/06/20/remember-when-patent-evergreening-was-being-debated-in-parliament/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2007 23:53:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kim</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Aus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lawfont.com/2007/06/20/remember-when-patent-evergreening-was-being-debated-in-parliament/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just prior to the last election campaign, there was a big debate about patent evergreening, in which IP academics and patent lawyers around the country nearly had heart attacks as Opposition leader Latham and PM Howard debated the finer points of patent law in the heated atmosphere of Parliament. Too much excitement! Part of the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lawfont.com/2007/06/20/remember-when-patent-evergreening-was-being-debated-in-parliament/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

