Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Biotech Genome Patents Invalidated?

Posted by chrisd on from the uspto-does-something-interesting dept.

bruthasj writes "The Boston Globe has a piece about all the Biotechs grabbing patents that dealt with segments of the Human Genome. It appears there are work arounds and that the USPTO basically disregards further patents on the genome. As one quoted: ''The land grab is over''. Read about it here."

3 of 148 comments (clear)

  1. what about by jsse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    previous patents? I think USPTO should admit their mistake and invalidate them too.

  2. something people are overlooking... by zonker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    while i wholeheartedly agree that patenting things like genes seems obviously public domain and incredibly prior art, there is a bigger issue at hand... money.

    several people in my family are scientists involved in genetic engineering and we have had this discussion many times. the point that they make is that pharmaceutical companies must be able to secure their findings to pay for the research they do to find these genes and produce drugs to treat various diseases. remember that companies like merck aren't doing research like this because they are simply curious, no instead they want to find things like the cure for cancer or diabetes or aids or the common cold because it makes them money.

    this research is ungodly expensive, so the drug companies want to make sure that if they did the research and found something, their competitors won't be able to cash in on it before they do. or worse yet, some company in asia making pills for next to nothing. this is their greatest fear, and this is why they patent things like there is no tomorrow.

    while i still find it morally and ethically wrong to patent things like genes, i can't come up with a better way for these companies to do their business. and as much as i'm not into big businesses, i do like staying healthy...

    --

    Large print giveth, and the small print taketh away

    1. Re:something people are overlooking... by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They can still patent developments from genes. They simply can't patent the genes themselves. There is a big difference between isolating the genes responsible for a certain type of heart complaint, and using those genes to develop a treatment. They still get repayed for their investment. It's just that the bar has been raised. They need something with a direct application rather than something that may or may not be required for a certain application.

      This does mean that they may be obliged to discover the genes themselves before developing the treatment, but they have the ability to do this. They can simply rely on trade secrets laws to prevent others from using the gene sequence, and equally, they can licence trade secrets. Their payoff is from the patent on the treatment, not the genes.

      The benefit is that this does still encourage information sharing, but also prevents extortionate charging for the root IP. You can choose to licence the information, or if the other company charges too much, you can simply rediscover it yourself. The risk that another company would start charging unfair amounts was a disincentive to actually develop anything based on publically available genes.