🚀 go-pugleaf

Rod Speed wrote:

>>said the effects would be felt by all developers, not
>>merely those who worked with open source software.
> 
> 
> Complete and utter pack of lies.

Rod you are completely wrong. Of course it affects all
developers.

>>He said the wording in the FTA suggested Australia's
>>software patents law and US laws would be harmonised.
> 
> 
> Complete and utter pack of lies. It does nothing of the sort.


FTA section 17.9.14

     Each Party shall endeavour to reduce differences in law and practice
     between their respective systems, including in respect of
     differences in determining the rights to an invention, the prior art
     effect of applications for patents, and the division of an
     application containing multiple inventions. In addition, each Party
     shall endeavour to participate in international patent harmonisation
     efforts, including the WIPO fora addressing reform and development
     of the international patent system.


>>"The US patent system for software has been broadly condemned
>>as flawed by many industry observers, even by the former Patent
>>and Trademark Office director himself," Scottt pointed out.
> 
> 
> Wota terminal fuckwit. ANY system has some flaws, fuckwit.

Many of the s/w patents granted by the US PTO are not really
valid.  They are either too broad or cover well known practice.
The US PTO leave it to the courts to figure it out.  BTW I
have a number of these patents (both US and Australian) and
have dealt with the process over the last decade (of course
my patents are completely valid :)   In some ways any changes
to reduce differences will be a good thing, at least for those
who apply for patents.

> There is NO provision in the FTA that requires us to adopt their system, fool.

Not precisely but as mentioned we are to minimise any differences

 From http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/negotiations/us_fta/guide/17.html

     8.3   A Cooperative Framework and Further Work (Article 17.9.4 and
           17.9.5)

	These Articles provide for cooperation and best endeavours to
	reduce certain differences in the patent laws and practices of
	Australia and the US and in international fora.   In addition,
	they encourage work towards the mutual exploitation of search
	and examination work.   This will benefit users of each system.

So while not a great deal there will be some change.


> Our patent system will NOT be changed by the FTA and whatever
> silly stuff applys to the US system, APPLYS NOW ANYWAY, fuckwit.

Not really true.  It's harder to get granted s/w patents here
than in the US.

> 
>>He said huge software houses had the resources to obtain patents.
> 
> 
> And most dont bother, even in the US system, fool.

Rubbish. You obviously don't follow it closely enough.

>>Scott also warned that there were an equal number
>>of issues which would arise with the introduction of
>>DMCA-style legislation, also mandated by the FTA. "
> 
> 
> We've ALREADY done our own, fuckwit.
> 
> And no FTA gets to force particular legislation here anyway.

Quote (again from the FTA guide mentioned above) in reference
to section 17.4.7 of the FTA,

     "Implementation of this Article will require legislative change.
      The nature and extent of those changes need to be carefully
      explored.   Article 17.12 provides that Australia has a two year
      period from the date of entry into force of the Agreement to
      implement its obligations under this provision."


>>He was referring to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
>>which was signed into law in the US on October 28, 1998.
> 
> 
> We've ALREADY done our own, fuckwit.

As we are obliged to do so under WIPO treaties however the FTA
will bring in some changes to bring us more in line with the
methods used in the USA.

> Its done and dusted, fool.

Yep.