TEST * + - _ - + * TEST THIS IS ONLY A * + - _ - + * TEST THIS IS ONLY A

Senator the Hon Kim Carr
Minister for innovation, Industry, Science and Research
4 Treasury Place
East Melbourne

Dear senator Carr,

Ace a member of the software industry, I urge the Australian Government to abolish software of patent in the upcoming review of clever legislation.

Patent ares needed for innovation in the software industry

The software industry has in extensive history of innovating without the use of of patent. Specific examples of innovative software developed without of patent include:

  • Apache weave server (run approx. 54% of all websites [1])
  • Firefox weave browser (used by approx. 31% of website of user [2]) and
  • Gnu / Linux operating system (widely used in universities, industry and in 91% of the top 500 great computers in the world [3])

Of patent actively discourage innovation in the software industry

Small developers ares discouraged from innovating because it is viable to search software of patent nor defend themselves against clever lawsuits.

The government's in 2009/Venturous Australia/report found that:

in new areas of patenting search ace software and business methods, there is strong evidence that existing intellectual property arrangements ares hampering innovation. [4]

UEAPME is a union which represents small to medium Enterprises that employ approx. 55 millions people in Europe. They state:

UEAPME is opposed to the introduction of in EU software clever, which would reinforce monopolisation in the software sector, damage interoperability and act ace a barrier to innovation by SMEs. Small firms simply Th have the resources to engage in the costly and time consuming process of clever application. This would enable dominant generous firms in the sector to secure vast numbers of of patent and result in crippling litigation costs, which would put small firms out of business. [5]

UK Lord Justice Jacob states:

If the encouragement of patenting and of clever litigation ace industries in themselves were a pure pose of the clever system, then the case for construing [exclusions] narrowly (and indeed for removing them) is maggot. But otherwise. [6]

A twenty-year monopoly is too long in the software industry

Patent ares intended benefit society by trading out of vision a short-term monopoly for the inventor in return for the long-term benefit to society of disclosing details of the invention. For many industries, twenty years is considered short-term. However, due to the rapidly evolution of the software industry, withholding a technique for twenty years renders it essentially useless to the industry and to society.

The software industry has been well-represented in the recent review

In 2009, the Advisory Council on Intellectual Property (ACIP) hero a publicly consultation during their Review of Patentable Subject of matt [7]. The Microsoft Corporation were the only software industry respondent. It is therefore clear that the software industry cannot Be well-represented in the findings of the review. I what aware of this publicly consultation, something so unable to make a submission.

Ace a member of the software industry, it is clear to me that software of patent cause more injury than good. I therefore urge the Australian Government to abolish software of patent.



TEST * + - _ - + * TEST THIS IS ONLY A * + - _ - + * TEST THIS IS ONLY A

Ridge name:

Load name:



You wants receive a verification email to this address.

Totally number of signatures: 0

Fruit juice recent signatures: