Dupe culture and patent costs threaten the next great Australian inventions

The Hills Hoist, the bionic ear, the goon sack: all great Australian inventions that have contributed to our daily lives.

But the story of one of their contemporaries – the “Fluicer”, a folding citrus juicer created by Brisbane’s Alex Gransbury – should be a warning about how difficult patent law and deep-pocketed major retailers may be stamping out Australian ingenuity.

After the Fluicer was named one of Time’s best inventions of 2023, folding juicers have been reproduced by Kmart and Target’s low-cost brand Anko – for $5 – and Chinese online mega-retailer Temu. With these “dupes” a quarter of its price, it is not hard to see why budget-conscious households may struggle to justify buying the original.

The trouble is, in the Australian market, inventors may also struggle to justify protecting their designs.

As reported by Jessica Yun and Daniel Lo Surdo in the Sun-Herald, about 92 per cent of the more than 31,500 patents filed to national regulatory body IP Australia last year were by overseas residents; fewer than one in 10 were for Australians.

A 2021 independent review of small- and medium-sized businesses’ ability to gain patents, commissioned by the former Coalition government, found mounting legal and professional service fees often came as a “great shock”, contributing to a “fear of litigation” among smaller businesses.

With the costs of securing a single patent with an attorney estimated at $20,000, it is understandable that many small businesses prioritise getting a product to market above protecting their rights to produce it exclusively.

It is a shame both that government and the current government have failed to address any of the review’s 16 recommendations, which include increasing the speed at which patents are assessed, investigating a process for providing expedited and inexpensive legal proceedings, and establishing a low-cost arbitration service and patent defence fund – all steps to try to make protecting their IP more manageable for Australian businesses.

But while cost is currently a disincentive for small businesses to protect their ideas, there is likely a cultural issue at play, too.

Call it a pre-emptive reaction to “tall poppy syndrome”, or just keeping your feet on your ground, but Australians do not like to think too much of themselves.

Take the court of public opinion on Olympic breakdancer Raygun, who was criticised for her attempts to patent her name and distinctive dance poses through intellectual property law.

Believing that your idea is so good and original that no one else should be able to infringe upon it requires some ego.

But without mustering up a bit of pride – and self-preservation – Australia runs the risk of losing the next Hills Hoist, bionic ear or even goon sack to a mass-producing multinational: there is no incentive for local inventors to continue to think of ways to improve our lives if the profits end up with a mega-retailer able to produce the same design at a fraction of the cost.

Bevan Shields sends an exclusive newsletter to subscribers each week. Sign up to receive his Note from the Editor.