Domain Names in Australia - Legal and Contractual Dispute Resolution
Owen Bradfield

Abstract
With the increasing use of the Internet in both public and private life, there is increasing competition for domain names. This has led to disputes concerning the rights of parties to particular domain names, and discussion as to the precise relationship between domain names and trademarks. Recently, .au Domain Administration (auDA) assumed the rights to administer Australian domain names and, in August 2002, established an Australian dispute resolution policy (auDRP) for domain name registration. This represented an extension of the American-based Uniform dispute resolution policy (UDRP) that had been in force in Australia for some time. However, the impact of these changes to dispute resolution in Australia remains to be realised, particularly since there has been little judicial comment on domain names in Australia.

Recent Developments in Chinese Intellectual Property Law
Xiaoqing Feng

Abstract
Since 1978, when it began its policy of reform and opened its economy to the outside world, China has increasingly emphasised the protection of intellectual property. This article deals with two aspects of Chinese intellectual property law, which have developed in response to the information revolution, the protection of layout-designs for integrated circuits and the extension of copyright protection to transmission over information networks.

Intellectual property protection of layout-design poses some specific problems. In many jurisdictions, including China, patent and copyright protection has been found inadequate, leading to legislation providing intellectual property protection tailor-made for layout designs. The article examines the Chinese legislation, looking at issues such as the requirement of originality, the scope of and entitlement to exclusive rights of commercial exploitation and limits on those rights, registration, and liability for breach. The article also compares some provisions of the legislation with relevant articles of the TRIPS Agreement.

The second part of the article deals with recent Chinese legislation giving copyright owners a right of transmission of copyright information on networks, including the Internet, television, telephone and mobile telephone networks. The article also considers the protection the legislation gives to technical measures designed to protect copyright and to protect electronic information as to the ownership and management of rights attached to recordings such as sound and video recordings. The rights given by the Chinese law are compared with the provisions of some of the WIPO treaties.

Legal Issues Relating to Free and Open Source Software
Professor Brian Fitzgerald & Graham Bassett
With
Larry Rosen (Rosenlaw.com), Bill Lard (Sun Microsystems), David Schellhase (formerly Linuxcare), Yancy Lind (Lutris Technologies)

Abstract
The paper examines many of the legal issues surrounding free and open source software and the licensing arrangements used to ensure that it remains free and open. First, the paper contrasts proprietorial software licensing which aims to protect the developer's intellectual property monopoly in the software for reasons of commercial gain, with non-proprietorial software licensing which is developed by communities of programmers for little commercial gain. Then it looks at two types of non-proprietorial software licences, free and open source, examining the tension between the two and setting out the terms of various free and open source licences in table form. Finally, the article considers some of the legal issues relating to free and open source licensed software, such as the viral nature of free software, the point at which one is contractually bound by an open source licence, and some jurisdictional and choice of law problems which are likely to arise in the future with respect to the enforcement of free software licences.

The second part of the paper is the transcript of proceedings at a seminar at Santa Clara University on legal and commercial difficulties relating to open source software. The first contributor was Larry Rosen, a lawyer and executive director of Open Source Initiative who analysed the differences between free and open source software before considering some of the legal problems to which free and open source software licences give rise. He was followed by David Schellhase, an inhouse lawyer for a Linux services company, who compared the legal problems faced by a company working with open source software to those faced by a company working with proprietary software. Yancy Lind, a business man, then considered the difficulties faced by companies trying to make open source software commercially successful. Bill Lard a lawyer who is responsible for Sun Microsystems' technology licensing strategy, then spoke about the place of public licensing in the industry in general and in Sun's licensing strategy in particular.

Proof Analysis of the Performance of China's Patent System
Liu Hua & Xiao Hong-rong

Abstract
On the basis of a theoretical demonstration of a legal system's utility, this paper makes an overall evaluation of the dynamic utility of China's patent system since its establishment. The proof analysis shows that there is a connection between the utility of a patent system and the degree to which China has developed: there is a close correlation between the number of patent grants and the GDP of a nation. In addition, utility models and designs have had a remarkable impact on China's economic growth, while the impact of inventions has been limited. The authors suggest that the present emphasis on the perfection of China's patent system and other relevant policies should be shifted towards innovative high technology. It is also essential to improve the commercial environment in which patent technology is utilised.

Recent Developments in Australian Spam Law
Jeremy Malcolm

Abstract
The article examines recent legal responses to bulk email, especially bulk commercial email (spam) in Australia and considers the current remedies which may be available against spammers, both common law and statute. First, it considers the recommendations of the National Office for the Information Economy on the problem of spam and the response of the Internet Industry Association to the problem. It also considers the extent to which the transmission and content of spam is regulated under existing legislation such as the Trade Practices Act, the Corporations Law, the Privacy Act, the Broadcasting Services Act and the Criminal Code Act. After noting the position in the United Sates and Europe, the article considers Australian case law. It analyses torts and contracts remedies which may be available against spammers and which spammers may be able to use against persons who attempt to block or encourage others such as ISPs to block the receipt of spam. In its conclusion, the article suggests how the law and the information industry should deal with spam.