The article however seems to avoid the issue that if TKMS still owns Kockums (as indicated here http://www.kockums.se/en/ ) then TKMS through Kockums retains many intellectual property rights that Sweden-Saab assumes are Sweden's rights. Intellectual property like the Stirling engine may be used in Australia's future submarine. But who owns the the intellectual property rights to the Soryu's Stirling engine and separately does Germany mostly own the licensing rights to the Soryu's diesel? Sweden-Saab? Germany-TKMS-Kockums as it applies to Japan? Where do Japan's submarine builders, Mitsubishi and Kawasaki, stand? It all needs to be clarified by German, Swedish, Japanese and Australian lawyers, businessmen and politicians. See also "The reported Swedish solution would buy [Australia's] ASC" below.
Here are the relevant parts of the article which is on the Defense Industry Daily website http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/saab-story-swedens-new-submarines-024760/ :