Australian patents have narrowed over time, with a 3rd of Australian patents still broader, compared to equivalent patents granted in the EU and US.
The value and impact of a patent depend on its scope, which is how broad or specific its claims are. Broad patents, covering general ideas (e.g. the incandescent light bulb), are more likely to overlap with competing products than narrow patents that focus on specific details (e.g. an incandescent light bulb with a carbonised filament).
Broad patents can boost investment by letting innovators build on their ideas, but overly broad claims may discourage competition and innovation by making infringement more likely. To prevent this, patent systems carefully regulate how broad patents can be.
We asked Swinburne University to compare Australian patents with those in the EU and US. The study looked at the effects of the Intellectual Property Laws Amendments (Raising the Bar) Act 2012, which aimed to narrow patent claims to better match global standards.
Key findings
- Australia’s Raising the Bar reforms reduced the proportion of Australian patents that are broader than their international equivalents by around 10%.
- Around a 3rd of Australian patents examined after the Raising the Bar reforms are broader than their international equivalents, based on this study’s methods.
- Patent quality standards have increased in consistency across technology areas.