U.S. Denies Patent on Part-Human Hybrid

jimkski wrote to mention a Boston Globe story involving the refusal of a patent claim on a genetically engineered creature. From the article: "A New York scientist's seven-year effort to win a patent on a laboratory-conceived creature that is part human and part animal ended in failure Friday, closing a historic and somewhat ghoulish chapter in U.S. intellectual property law."

Comments

so you can genetically engineer corn, and pigs

[Rooked_One]

and just about anything else thats alive, but not people?

I'm not looking for a troll here, i'm just smoking some genetically engineered marijuana and it seems like an odd thought.

How about part tree and part plant?

[Eunuch]

Humans are a subset of animals. Get it? It looks the article actually recognizes this, which is refreshing but rare. It's hard to even have a talk about important issues such as consciousness and genetics when we can't get even get passed a basic fact.

Re:How about part tree and part plant?

[Jugalator]

Humans possess free-will. We can explore past and future; we can question right from wrong; love from hate. We can plan for the future and learn from our mistakes. We are not governed by instinct as animals are: We can learn an action, govern what we do by that and decide that it is no longer necessary and try something else.

Yes, humans are mammals with a lot of intelligence, relatively speaking.

So?

NO animal other than the human being can claim any of this.

No, other animals are less smart.

Now, how do intelligence set us apart from other mammals? Last time I looked, however intelligent you are, is no criteria for being a mammal or being "something else", at least as far as us humans have defined it.

I'd be happy about this

[Anonymous Coward]

But aren't a huge number of the alleles in the human genome patented already? It seems like this was done not because of a reasonable understanding on the part of the patent office that living creatures shouldn't be patentable, but purely because of the grossout factor. That's not a step forward.

Re:I'd be happy about this

[Anonymous Coward]

Alleles are not living entitites - they are different versions of a gene.

The problem is from my perspective it's roughly the same thing. I may not be patented. However if genes can be patented I am naturally violating patents, continuously, just by virtue of sitting here and having functioning testicles, since I am constantly engaging in acts of meiosis whether I will it or no. I realize this isn't an exactly accurate depiction of how the gene patent process works, but if it's possible for there to be a human who cannot extract part of their body (a dna sequence in specific) and mass reproduce it at will, I don't see this as a significant difference from the human himself being patented.

This is where the complaint comes in that the patent system hasn't quite thought this through, they're just stopping at the point where the "eww" gets too intense for them.

dare I say it?

[ErichTheWebGuy]

Could the USPTO finally be gaining a bit of common sense? Nah, this is more likely because of the republican administration and the likely implication of granting this patent.

Re:dare I say it?

[budgenator]

no I think the implication is that the pressure from the whacko-religious near-terrorist christian extremists would become to much to bear if the governament started patenting human-animal chimeras. It would errode the sacredicity of humanity by forcing them to move from their present all-or-nothing view humans, i.e. that thing god created first to an actual definition that would stand muster in a secular legal scope.

Re:dare I say it?

[demachina]

"I expect the Religious Right will end up getting steam-rolled over the genetic engineering issue"

Well American bible thumpers have a multipart strategy for countering the hordes of 7.5 feet tall Chinese with the 220 IQ:

- Nuclear weapons, lots of nuclear weapons, so if the good lord wont start the rapture they can give him(or her) a hand with an artificial one. The U.S. government is apparently starting work on two new warhead designs, in defiance of several efforts by Congress to stop it, one really big and one really small. If the Republican's hold power a little while longer its likely we will see them break the global test ban treaty and start firing off nukes again. The test ban will most likely land in the same dumper as the ABM treaty, and the Kyoto accords, and the Geneva conventions on treating prisoners, Geneve conventions on treating civilians in occupied countries, U.S laws against torture, U.S. laws on due process, and of course the Constitution.

- Missile defense, it probably doesn't work but if it did it would keep the super intelligent Chinese from shooting back

- Stamp out birth control and abortion. Most religions do everything in their power to maximize population growth to increase the size of their flock, even if it does mean massive overpopulation. The Chinese are, by contrast aggressively trying to control population growth so maybe the bible thumpers, given enough time can out breed and out number them. There will be irony if in the next big war there will be a billion American soldiers, praising Jesus, as they use human waves to overwhelm the tiny Chinese Army, big and intelligent though they may be.

If the Chinese do all develop 220 IQ's there is a chance they might all become extremely enlightened and liberal. That means they will probably unilaterally disarm, and will be reluctant to start a war.

In this area low IQ Americans have a huge advantage. They will bankrupt their country buying weapons, and more weapons, and they are willing to use them at a drop of a hat.

I guess I'm saying is its possible geneticly engineering, super intelligent Chinese might be sitting ducks for low IQ, bigoted, hate filled, bible thumping Americans, who'll push the button in the name of Jesus.

Inadequate buyoffs

[Anonymous Coward]

In other words, he didn't own a multi-billion dollar corporation that could pay off the right people.

Hopefully this will be a tipping point

[Anonymous Coward]

A patent application was denied! Wow! That is news!

One click buying...

[Cycline3]

If they let Amazon patent one click buying, why not let someone patent this? It's in so many ways more deserving... I mean... patent one click? Who is going to patent double click and triple clicks?

Does precedence matter to the USPTO?

[PornMaster]

While there may be issues of precedence in the US legal system, does precedence hold importance in the USPTO, particularly with regard to an "inaction" of not granting a patent?

Re:Wow - you had me at "US denies patent".

[LucidBeast]

The article rises an interesting question though. When do we cross over to the unpatentable? If we keep adding human genes to a mouse for what ever purpose, does the mouse eventually cross that line? I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of patented animals that contain human genes. I don't know if there are any that contain many human genes, but I would imagine that for some purposes that would be desirable. Of course there are about 40k genes in humans (last count I remember) so getting to a significant percentage is a long shot.

Prediction

[LaCosaNostradamus]

If a corporation attempts to patent much the same thing, it will be granted.

Re:Prediction

[Anonymous Coward]

It will happen eventually. Just because the patent was denied now does not mean that some corporation will not lobby hard enough to make the patent office change its mind.

Re:So this means...

[Anonymous Coward]

Half-man half-shark? Sounds like they ARE the IP lawyers!

Re:Wow - you had me at "US denies patent".

[Nefarious Wheel]

(slightly off-topic, apologies) I read a short SF story a long time ago about people who had genetically re-engineered pigs so they didn't have a cloven hoof. IIRC The plot revolved around whether the resulting bacon was kosher or not, and whether or not it could be patented, and whether or not a commercial entity could own the only source of a population segment's (newly) preferred food.

If you think about it, this would be an extraordinarily contentious issue for a major segment of the population.

This made me wonder -- how much of the controversy about GE foods is based in science, and how much based in culture?

Re:A victory and a loss for the filer

[Anonymous Coward]

On the other hand, his loss is bad -- other people/companies can feel free to create chimaeras.

This is kind of silly. Assuming that creating chimaeras is "bad", why should patent law be the thing to prevent it? That's not the purpose of patent law, and it would only have a limited effect since patents expire.

If this is a morally unacceptable thing to do, then criminal law should be used to prevent it. That is its purpose, after all.

Pfft (that's the USPTO blowing raspberries)

[lpontiac]

the Court explained that while .. abstract ideas .. are not patentable

Fat lot of fucking good this decision did.

Re:Wow - you had me at "US denies patent".

[Bob Uhl]

That was before genomics, I still assume we'd find the results of a modern genomic comparisson embarrassing to our human ego's[sic].

I don't know: show me the ape which has conquered the planet, which has tamed the forces of nature, which thinks, and maybe I'll consider him my equal...

Planet of the Apes?

[Orion Blastar]

Anyone remember that movie? They tried to give Apes human-like abilities by introducing human DNA into them. The Apes, therefore, were ape-human hybirds.

Now that the patent is denied, nobody will have any reason to make an Ape-Human hybrid that will ultimately take over planets and such in the future.

Re:Wow - you had me at "US denies patent".

[demachina]

"I don't know: show me the ape which has conquered the planet, which has tamed the forces of nature, which thinks, and maybe I'll consider him my equal..."

Maybe you haven't noticed but great apes are for the most part polygamists, nudists, pacifists, vegetarians and environmentalists. Were it not for their insanely destructive, and apparently extremely dumb, homo sapien next of kin they would probably live a relatively idyllic life for eons.

Unfortunately their insanely destructive, and apparently extremely dumb, Homo Sapien next of kin, are most probably going to wipe them out in a genocidal campaign probably because they are both pacifists and apparently liberals. Not long after that there is a fair chance homo sapiens will turn the entire planet in to an unbearable hell hole, thanks to overpollution, global warming, clear cutting forests, overpopulation, war, starvation, etc.

"I'll consider him my equal"

I'm pretty sure the great apes would consider it a pretty serious slap in the face if Homo Sapiens were to be so pretentious as to even suggest they were as good as the great apes.

Re:Kosher pork

[mattdm]

Ooh, there's some really good property law bits in the next part:

Deuteronomy 23:24: If you enter your neighbor's vineyard, you may eat all the grapes you want, but do not put any in your basket. 25. If you enter your neighbor's grainfield, you may pick kernels with your hands, but you must not put a sickle to his standing grain.

It's biblical fair use!

At what point.... (?)

[Wiseazz]

From the article: "At what point is something too human to patent?"

Interesting question, but not easy to answer. A related question would be: at what point does a collection of cells become a human being and legal citizen with rights, etc. I think if we could answer that to everyone's satisfaction (or most everyone), then the author's question would also be satisfied. What does it mean to be human, and how closely do we guard nature's original design against scientific advances, personal liberties (abortion, made-to-order children...), etc.? Just questions to answer questions, I know... someone smarter than me can figure it out.

And by introducing abortion-related musings into the conversation, please allow me to apologize for bringing us that much closer to invoking Godwin (as abortion discussions almost always spiral downwards) In my defense, the issue *does* raise similiar concerns/issues/questions.