Trading our intellectual property for a lamb chop ...

Put starkly, they say, the intellectual property rights regime we have today, largely represents the failure of democratic processes (p12). Why, they ask, would Australia (and other nations) willingly “give up sovereignty over something as fundamental as the property laws that determine the ownership of information and the technologies that so profoundly affect the basic rights of their citizens?” (Intellectual Feudalism, p11.)

Much the same questions were asked again in 2005 when Australia signed the Free Trade Agreement with the USA. According to one esteemed Australian journalist we traded our IP for a lamb chop. Sydney Morning Herald business commentator Ross Gittins said much the same thing: “To the Australian negotiators it is about eliminating trade barriers; to the US it is all about IP”. They sell it and we buy it. On their terms.

And that’s the story of how IP has become the new wealth. And how countries that don’t “harmonise” their IP laws with the US are in trouble; and individuals who don’t go along with the US laws designed to lock up American IP - are pirates and criminals.

For Australia to routinely commercialise its many great inventions it would have to get round some of the present “harmonisation” requirements. This would take some inventive thinking. But the nation would also need to consider whether it would be prepared to go as far as the US model in protecting that intellectual property.