Have your say on IP policy
We encourage anyone to offer feedback and submit comments on existing and new policy or legislative issues.
You can provide your feedback about anything to do with IP policy, including how it could be reviewed, implemented or improved.Comment on existing policy issues
When providing feedback on an existing policy issue, it may be helpful to answer the following questions:
- Do you support the proposed solution to the issue? Why or why not?
- Is there a better way of solving the issue? What makes it better?
- Has an important aspect of the issue been overlooked?
- Can you see any unintended consequences resulting from the policy proposal?
- Do you agree with the current priority assigned to this issue? Why or why not?
Your feedback isn't limited to the above points — if you have something else for us to consider, we want to hear it.
When you're ready, submit your feedback and any supporting evidence to our policy register.
Types of evidence
Good policy development uses evidence and insights from a range of different perspectives, so the type of information that can make up evidence is broad.
While independent sources or statistical evidence will help build a convincing case, other types of evidence, such as case studies, are still useful in contributing to the understanding of a policy problem or issue.
For example, if numerous detailed and credible confidential examples are provided that shows a business suffering significant losses, then this may be more persuasive than a single public example of one court case that demonstrated only a small loss to the litigant.
Peer-reviewed quantitative studies
For example: “The following article in the Journal of IP Economics found that a statistically-significant number of cases encountered this problem.”
Peer-reviewed qualitative studies
For example: “The following article in the Journal of IP Law identified a loophole in the legislation and several cases where problems arose.”
Unreviewed quantitative studies
For example: “We searched the IPGOD dataset and found that 5,172 applications have encountered the problem over the last 5 years.”
Public examples or case studies
For example: “The court cases of White v Brown and Jones v Smith all demonstrate users encountering the problem.”
Comparison with other jurisdictions
For example: “The Australian system is out of alignment with the system in Japan, where cases are dealt with differently.”
For example: "The provision could be interpreted by an Australian court such that users would encounter problems.”
For example: “We think this is a serious problem and would like it to be addressed.”
For example: “We have encountered this problem several times, details of which were provided in confidence.”
Submitting confidential evidence
Sometimes, the evidence might be confidential, privileged or commercially-sensitive. If you want your submission to remain confidential, let us know by clearly marking information in your submission as ‘confidential’. We'll follow your wishes in line with our privacy notice.
When we review your feedback and supporting evidence, we also take into account other considerations, such as:
- Australia's international obligations
- Balancing the interest of all stakeholders
- Complexity of the proposed change (legislative versus non-legislative)
- Balancing reform of the IP system across all IP rights
- Alignment with government priorities.
If you'd like more information about using research-based evidence to support policy making, you can read the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) guidelines.