<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>IPwars - Latest Comments</title><link xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="http://api.friendfeed.com/2008/03#sup" href="http://disqus.com/sup/all.sup#forumcomments-ecd23de6" type="application/json"/><link>http://ipwars.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://ipwars.disqus.com/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2012 14:21:09 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Patents, copyright and competition</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2012/10/03/patents-copyright-and-competition/#comment-686374423</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The blog is worth to read..Judge Posner recently dismissed&lt;br&gt; both Apple’s and Motorola Mobility’s attempts to use their respective &lt;br&gt;patent portfolios to extract injunctions and damages from the other..&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Private Schools Victoria</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2012 14:21:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Access to affordable medicines or new review of pharmaceutical patents</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2012/10/17/access-to-affordable-medicines-or-new-review-of-pharmaceutical-patents/#comment-685628626</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Dr Summerfield, over at Patentology, gets cross: &lt;a href="http://blog.patentology.com.au/2012/10/yet-another-patent-system-review.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://blog.patentology.com.au...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Warwick Rothnie</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2012 17:47:26 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: ALRC&amp;#8217;s Copyright and Digital Economy Issues Paper</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2012/08/20/alrcs-copyright-and-digital-economy-issues-paper/#comment-624499300</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Fiona Phillips, Executive Director at the Australian Copyright Council, will be conducting a 'Hot Topics' seminar in Melbourne on 7 September 2012: &lt;a href="http://www.copyright.org.au/pdf/sempromos/seminars2012/hottopics.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.copyright.org.au/pd...&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">iWarwick</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2012 20:36:01 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: ISPs and &amp;#8220;3&amp;#8243; strikes in Australia</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/12/16/isps-and-3-strikes-in-australia/#comment-614076898</link><description>&lt;p&gt;On the costs of running the loi Hadopi in France &lt;a href="http://the1709blog.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/hadopi-failure-warning-for-uk.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://the1709blog.blogspot.co...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">iWarwick</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2012 22:01:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Compulsory licensing of patents</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2012/07/18/compulsory-licensing-of-patents/#comment-595164947</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Compulsory licensing is a contemporary necessity, and I'm glad to see countries from Australian to China implementing this model. I, for one, am heartened not only by the Indian Patent Office's recent decision to grant a compulsory license, but also by the further news that India now has plans to distribute some life-saving drugs for free. That -- and not gouging suffering patients at every possible opportunity -- seems to me to be the epitome of corporate responsibility.&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.generalpatent.com/blog" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.generalpatent.com/b...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">patent litigation</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2012 03:52:29 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A few exercises in parody?</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2012/07/02/a-few-exercises-in-parody/#comment-584332944</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Nice article, thanks for the information.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">rental mobil</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:37:30 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The price of digital downloads in Australia</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2012/05/03/the-price-of-digital-downloads-in-australia/#comment-517423041</link><description>&lt;p&gt;One particularly egregious example of the behaviour that Brian highlights in his article, that I have come across, is the supply of audiobooks from &lt;a href="http://Audible.com" rel="nofollow"&gt;Audible.com&lt;/a&gt;. They quote fantastical numbers of items available in audio format - last I heard something like 25,000. But sign up with an Aussie credit card (the only means possible) and a lot of the content is not available. They wouldn't tell me how much, but a very rough survey of 100 books they had on special showed that only aroung 25% of them were available here.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ian McCauley</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 03:32:53 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The price of digital downloads in Australia</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2012/05/03/the-price-of-digital-downloads-in-australia/#comment-517374508</link><description>&lt;p&gt;That is an interesting point, Robbie.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Anecdotally, I have noticed that books available through both the Kindle Store and the iBook store are often (but not always) cheaper in the iBook store than at Amazon. Sometimes, of course, a particular title is not available on one or other (or both, for that matter).&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">iWarwick</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 01:49:48 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The price of digital downloads in Australia</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2012/05/03/the-price-of-digital-downloads-in-australia/#comment-517371547</link><description>&lt;p&gt;It is interesting that the price of apps in the iTunes store is roughly equal for Australians and Americans whereas songs, movies and TV shows are typically much more expensive for Australians. Apple has world-wide distribution rights for apps whereas has to negotiate with regional copyright holders for the other media. The same pattern can be seen for ebooks published by Amazon vs ebooks from traditional publishers.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;This suggests it is the publishers, not the retailers, that are responsible for the high prices in Australia.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">RobbieClarken</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 01:44:08 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Roadshow v iiNet</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2012/04/20/roadshow-v-iinet-3/#comment-506042511</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Can't wait to hear what you have to say on this but is there anything hugely different in this judgement from the 2010 appeal? &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">FreddyB</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 22 Apr 2012 07:18:44 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: De-linking intellectual property from exclusive rights</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/11/09/de-linking-intellectual-property-from-exclusive-rights/#comment-500676905</link><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://generic-labs.net" rel="nofollow"&gt;generic labs&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Thanks for shearing..&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ggreen Molly</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 07:00:36 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Registering a trade mark in bad faith</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2012/02/17/registering-a-trade-mark-in-bad-faith/#comment-442613382</link><description>&lt;p&gt;After posting this, I received some feedback questioning, if this was not bad faith, what ever will be?&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Now, there is certainly a lot of force in that question.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, the expression "tennis warehouse" is pretty descriptive. Would it be "bad faith" to adopt "tennis supermarket" after spotting someone else using that on the web?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">iWarwick</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 00:20:57 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: ISP gets DMCA win in USA</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/12/22/isp-gets-dmca-win-in-usa/#comment-435153449</link><description>&lt;p&gt;DMCA is one of the most reliable tool.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;  &lt;a href="http://www.dmcanow.com/about-dmca.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.dmcanow.com/about-d...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">dmca process</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:17:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Extraditing (alleged) copyright criminals</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2012/01/18/extraditing-alleged-copyright-criminals/#comment-433903385</link><description>&lt;p&gt;If it happen to UK citizen then any country citizen may face same legal issue.. i am not clear how aussie law handle with this copy right issue for the foreigners .&lt;br&gt;Dona&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.hecken.com.au" rel="nofollow"&gt;probate lawyers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dona yanni</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 07:13:01 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Smartphone patent landscape</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/11/08/smartphone-patent-landscape/#comment-359592272</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for your interest in the article.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Just to clarify, however, I am not for one moment suggesting that Samsung should be allowed to evade its FRAND obligations, or that any patentee which willingly contributes technology to a standard should be permitted to hold any implementer of the standard to ransom.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;But there are complex legal and commercial issues involved.  In my view, the FRAND licensing regime ought to be allowed to operate such that it becomes commercially attractive for a company like Apple to cross-license its patents as a way to reduce license fees payable (which end up impacting the price of its products and/or its profit margins).&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If, for example, Apple is able to obtain the full benefit of Samsung's FRAND patents for the cost of the royalty built into the price of a $20 Qualcomm part, and use this to compete against Samsung in the market for tablets and smartphones costing $600-$1000, then what exactly (in a commercial sense) is fair and reasonable about this situation?&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;What would you suggest that Samsung should have done?  Had it not been willing to contribute its patented technologies to the standard on FRAND terms then it would have no mechanism to obtain a reasonable return on its investment in developing those technologies, from which an entire industry (incluidng Apple) benefits.  Instead, it would have had to pay someone else.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;If Apple wants to make the commercial choice to pay FRAND royalties, keep its 'user experience' technologies for itself, and charge a price premium for devices incorporating those technologies, then I have absolutely no problem with that.  On one view, what Samsung is asking the Federal Court to decide is whether Apple should be allowed to have its cake, and eat it too.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mark Summerfield</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:26:19 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Tobacco Plain Packaging Bill 2011</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/07/14/tobacco-plain-packaging-bill-2011/#comment-354655402</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I think government should take a strict action againstthose companies which are making tobacco products.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Brisbane Indoor Sports</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2011 08:06:40 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Apple v Samsung</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/10/20/apple-v-samsung-2/#comment-353008118</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Though of course it's completely legal for companies to pursue injunctive measures against their competition, I am ambivalent; is it ethical for corporations to use patent infringement litigation merely as an anti-competitive tactic, or should these disputes be settled in the marketplace, where they belong?&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.generalpatent.com/blog/" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.generalpatent.com/b...&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">patent litigation</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 01 Nov 2011 15:05:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The onus on appeal from a trade mark opposition</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2010/06/09/the-onus-on-appeal-from-a-trade-mark-opposition/#comment-336512636</link><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://mcintoship.com.au/" rel="nofollow"&gt;Trademark attorney&lt;/a&gt; is very useful for your business to be patent.  That's my advice&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Christian James</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 06:12:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Copyright safe harbour scheme review Mk 2</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/10/17/copyright-safe-harbour-scheme-review-mk-2/#comment-336325193</link><description>&lt;p&gt;See the Attorney-General's speech as the Copyright Symposium, referring to the consultation paper and the proposed ALRC reference&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.au/www/ministers/mcclelland.nsf/Page/Speeches_2011_FourthQuarter_14October2011-KeynoteAddressto15thBiennialCopyrightSymposium" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.attorneygeneral.gov...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mary Wyburn</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 16 Oct 2011 21:19:31 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Australia signed up to ACTA</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/10/03/australia-signed-up-to-acta/#comment-325924377</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Contrary to the USTR's view, TechDirt argues that US law will require change;&lt;br&gt;Canada's government has announced it will amend its laws to bring them into line with its ACTA obligations; and&lt;br&gt;apparently, New Zealand will also need to change its laws (again).&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://preview.tinyurl.com/66yuuka" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://preview.tinyurl.com/66y...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">iWarwick</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2011 18:18:43 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Optus TV Now &amp;#8230; 2</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/09/19/optus-tv-now-2/#comment-321488930</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Copyright Council's take:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://preview.tinyurl.com/3sjqjw8" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://preview.tinyurl.com/3sj...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">iWarwick</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 23:12:15 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Optus TV Now and the threat to sports&amp;#8217; millions</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/09/16/optus-tv-now-and-the-threat-to-sports-millions/#comment-312965562</link><description>&lt;p&gt;How does the product offering from Optus differ from something like TiVo though? Surely these recording 'devices' are closely analogous and would fall within s 111&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Copyright Fanatic</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2011 07:05:59 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: IPSANZ annual conference</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/09/02/ipsanz-annual-conference-2/#comment-302665476</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Glad you enjoyed it. There were some excellent sessions. Unfortunately, there often seemed like only enough time for 'fleeting' hellos here and there.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">iWarwick</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 04 Sep 2011 22:35:14 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: IPSANZ annual conference</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/09/02/ipsanz-annual-conference-2/#comment-302659194</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Sorry I missed you but it was a great conference! &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Sonal Moore</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 04 Sep 2011 22:14:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Apple v Samsung DownUnder</title><link>http://ipwars.com/2011/08/03/apple-v-samsung-downunder/#comment-276669721</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Well, it will definitely be interesting to see what happens. One can't expect that Apple has gone to war against one of its major suppliers only to back down meekly especially as Samsung seems to be attacking the core of Apple's tech darling status: the iPhone and iPad.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">iWarwick</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 21:47:55 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>