The problem child in Australian patent law : "fair" basing

The concept of "fair basing" is widely acknowledged as a difficult area of patent law. This article maps the development of fair basing law to demonstrate how some of the difficulties have arisen. Part I of the article traces the development of the branches of patent law that were swept under the nomenclature of "fair basing" by British legislation in 1949. It looks at the early courts' approach to patent construction, examines the early origin of fair basing and what it was intended to achiever. Part II of the article considers the modern interpretation of fair basing, which provides a striking contrast to its historical context. Without any consistent judicial approach to construction the doctrine has developed inappropriately, giving rise to both over-strict and over-generous approaches.

Play a role in the patent puzzle

Discusses the contentious issues surrounding computer software patents and patenting in connection with the Peer-to-Patent Australia project, a joint initiative of Queensland University of Technology (QUT) and New York Law School (NYLS) that operates with the support and endorsement of IP Australia, the government body housing Australia's patent office. Explains that the project is based on the successful Peer-to-Patent pilots run recently in the USA and Japan that are designed to improve the quality of issued patents and the patent examination process by facilitating community participation in that process. Describes how members of the public are allowed to put forward prior art references that will be considered by IP Australia's patent examiners when determining whether participating applications are novel and inventive, and therefore deserving of a patent. Concludes that, while Peer-to-Patent Australia is not a complete solution to the problems besetting patent law, the model has considerable advantages over the traditional model of patent examination

Bias in the nonlinear filter generator output sequence

Nonlinear filter generators are common components used in the keystream generators for stream ciphers and more recently for authentication mechanisms. They consist of a Linear Feedback Shift Register (LFSR) and a nonlinear Boolean function to mask the linearity of the LFSR output. Properties of the output of a nonlinear filter are not well studied. Anderson noted that the m-tuple output of a nonlinear filter with consecutive taps to the filter function is unevenly distributed. Current designs use taps which are not consecutive. We examine m-tuple outputs from nonlinear filter generators constructed using various LFSRs and Boolean functions for both consecutive and uneven (full positive difference sets where possible) tap positions. The investigation reveals that in both cases, the m-tuple output is not uniform. However, consecutive tap positions result in a more biased distribution than uneven tap positions, with some m-tuples not occurring at all. These biased distributions indicate a potential flaw that could be exploited for cryptanalysis.