Patent Trolls In Biotechnology

GNUman writes "A news story in this week's Nature Journal talks about patent trolls attacking biotech companies. They cite a case in which the U.S. federal court of appeals upheld 'a patent that covered the idea of trying to link infant vaccination with later immune disorders.' The news story also references an interesting article from researchers at Boston University School of Law (Bessen, James E. et al, 2011, 'The Private and Social Costs of Patent Trolls'), in which they analyze the effect of litigation on the wealth of the defendants via their stock's value before and after litigation, and given that such loss minimally translates into an increment in the wealth of the inventor, they determine that patent litigation harms society and removes incentives for innovation."

Comments

*facedesk*

[JustAnotherIdiot]

You know, it's one thing to troll companies and other entities who's sole purpose is to make money off the backs of customers, but this is just...ugh...

Monsanto anyone?

[maxwellmath]

I believe that monsanto might be considered under the category of biotechnology. They are the biggest patent troll I know of; holding patents on life its self.

Re:Monsanto anyone?

[dkleinsc]

Most notably, Monsanto has sued farmers because their crops (which were not Monsanto seeds) reproduced with pollen blown in from the neighbor's farm. Apparently, patent law trumps laws of nature, at least when it comes to assessing damages, because Monsanto has won those cases.

This despite the farmer's counterpoint that Monsanto's terminator gene was contaminating their crop, quite against the will of the farmer.

Re:Monsanto anyone?

[Rich0]

They're not really a patent troll - they actually make the stuff they patent.

A patent troll is somebody whose main business model is collecting license fees from things that OTHERS do, largely because they filed a patent on something that is easy to put into words and hard to put into practice.

You don't have to agree with Terminator Genes and all that stuff, but the fact is that they actually do make that stuff and you can buy it from them if you want it.

No, a patent troll is the guy who sues you for playing video on your cell phone, when they've never made a phone, media player application, or video format in their life.

Re:Monsanto anyone?

[sjames]

The farmer knowingly selected a desirable trait. Since they did no genetic analysis (and had no ability to do so), they didn't necessarily know it was from Monsanto GM crops (Monsanto did not create the gene from scratch, they just crammed it into the genomes of several food plants). It's noteworthy that the farmers were following all of the laws applying to proprietary hybrid seeds. That is, they are permitted to enjoy the benefit of such hybrids cross pollinating with their own strains (if the hybrid isn't sterile, of course).

Monsanto used big legal teams and abuse of patents to turn centuries of agricultural law on it's ear.

The waters are even muddier now that Monsanto canola has passed it's roundup readiness on to closely related wild plants in several states AND researchers have successfully bred roundup resistant plants without resorting to recombinant DNA techniques. Can they really lay claim to a gene in it's wild form?

Re:Patents are unnecesary

[JesseMcDonald]

Trade secrets would be preferable. At least then you could use whatever you can learn from reverse-engineering.

Very few trade secrets have ever been kept successfully for long. Some inventions might be locked up indefinitely, but most would probably be re-discovered or reverse-engineered long before a hypothetical patent would have expired.

Re:Patents are unnecesary

[sjames]

That implies that trivia reverse engineering should be added to the list of disqualifications on patents. Why should society pay such a hefty price for readily available information. It's like buying gourmet tap water.

Re:Patents are unnecesary

[sourcerror]

So companies wouldn't get sued for patent infringement, but invidual engineers for causing loss of profits by leaking secrets. Expect to see even worse NDA and noncompete clauses in employeed contracts.

Re:Can someone please tell me...

[Hatta]

Because large corporations are less vulnerable to patent trolls than small organizations. This creates a barrier to entry for that market, entrenching the large corporation. Since our government is wholly owned by large corporations we get the kind of law that benefits large corporations.