US District Judge Rules Gene Patents Invalid

shriphani writes "A US judge has ruled that Myriad Genetics' breast cancer gene patent is invalid. Hopefully this will go a long way in ensuring that patents on genes do not stand in the way of research. From the article: 'Patents on genes associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer are invalid, ruled a New York federal court today. The precedent-setting ruling marks the first time a court has found patents on genes unlawful and calls into question the validity of patents now held on approximately 2,000 human genes.'"

Comments

Re:Conversely

[eldavojohn]

Also, for context, the only real reason one would want to patent a gene is some sort of exclusivity clause (i.e. I discovered this breast cancer gene so now only I can work on a cure for it) or for patent trolling (now lets sue all the other folks working on breast cancer cures). Both scenarios would effectively destroy the ability for competing companies to work on the same disease, and lead to a massive gene-squatting free for all. IAAB (I am a biochemist), and I honestly can't think of any scenarios where being able to patent a naturally occurring gene would be good for either society as a whole or even just letting the market do what it does best.

I am not a biochemist so I must ask some questions about your particular example with breast cancer genes. I'm lead to believe that 'discovering a breast cancer gene' is extremely difficult. Doesn't the number of sets of DNA one must collect coupled with the accuracy of those collections coupled with the willingness of the volunteers coupled with the number of potential snippets of DNA that could be the gene coupled with all sorts of other complications and permutations make finding such a gene like finding a needle in a haystack? Doesn't that require vast amounts of resources? And then to do it for all sorts of diseases?

Now explain to me how those losses are recouped in your model. That's all I was asking. Not saying that astronomers should be able to patent planets they find or that discoveries should be patentable ... although I did enjoy all the strawmen that were thrown at me and the fact that they were modded up. I also enjoyed that because we've sequenced the gene, that makes for prior art should anyone actually begin to investigate what those genes are responsible for. But back to playing the devil's advocate. Here are proposed assumptions:

1. The odds of finding the breast cancer gene (or gene set, right?) are astronomically high.
2. Unfortunately, this is the only way to cure breast cancer once and for all.
3. If you found this, since it involved lottery winning odds you would recoup your investment at a lottery winning payout.
4. This doesn't mean you get to sue everyone who was looking for the gene(s) that caused breast cancer, it means if anyone uses your genes to develop a cure, you get royalties for that patent term.
5. Other teams can keep looking for a gene, they just have to normalize their data so that they aren't looking for your already discovered gene or (after checking your work against their data) doubt the accuracy of your samples and continue on with their quest.

Patent trolls are patent trolls. You'll find them anywhere you find patents. I scoff at your claims of gene squatting as you have to say what the gene does and pay the huge patent fees to get the patent (so you can't just patent each gene as the breast cancer gene).

Good luck with your work. I am glad that gene patents are invalid. I was merely expressing a mild amount of discomfort that it could have a negative overall effect. If you can assert that I'm confused or misinformed, I'd be a very happy man.

The volatility (put/call orders) on Myriad Genetics tells me this is going to have profound effects on genetics companies, I hope the best for your employment and hope that the entire genetics industry (and above searches) don't become insane burdens on the taxpayer.