Supreme Court to rule on patentability of human genes

[horusfalcon]

Yup, I agree with the earlier post about what Science and History teachers said... as Harlan Ellison has often observed, the most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity.

Gotta say, though, Just17 is making my point for me:  in places where patent laws are not as asinine as in the U.S., innovation and creativity are flourishing, while here, in what's supposed to be the "land of the free", we languish beneath undue corporate influence in our courts.

But.. enough politics.  I'm gettin' dangerously close to a rant, and don't have time for that now.

May we all be healthy, happy, and home for the holidays this season!

Later On,
D

[Bald Brick]

I would need a list of all those countries because there isn't only one. Worse than that, I would need to be able to know what was patented so I could exclude distribution to only those countries where what I had written included something that has been patented. The USPTO, for instance, does not publish patents to the public or allow public access to the list. Instead they sell the information to dedicated research and legal firms you have to pay to search for you. That means the ordinary person cannot know whether a patent exists in advance. You only find out when you get sued for infringing it.

It seems to me that this would be a good defence for people infringing patented code.

These days most judicial systems seem to accept the tenets of ignorantia legis neminem excusat and nemo censetur ignorare legem, i.e. nobody is supposed to be ignorant of the law and if they are anyway, that's no excuse, but even in the US the Supreme Court has found that there are exceptions to the rule, and in other countries you'll find a lot more exceptions.

Now, as patents are not even laws, I cannot imagine that any court anywhere would bankrupt you for being in breach of a software patent that you not only are unaware of but actually couldn't reasonably be expected to be aware of. Possibly you might have to stop distributing your software - but only in certain countries.

[menotu]

by Timothy B. Lee - Apr 14, 2013

Will the Supreme Court end human gene patents after three decades?

Court considers invalidating breast cancer gene patents—and thousands of others.

Since the 1980s, patent lawyers have been claiming pieces of humanity's genetic code. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has granted thousands of gene patents. The Federal Circuit, the court that hears all patent appeals, has consistently ruled such patents are legal.

But the judicial winds have been shifting. The Supreme Court has never ruled on the legality of gene patents. And recently, the Supreme Court has grown increasingly skeptical of the Federal Circuit's patent-friendly jurisprudence.

Meanwhile, a growing number of researchers, health care providers, and public interest groups have raised concerns about the harms of gene patents. The American Civil Liberties Union estimates that more than 40 percent of genes are now patented. Those patents have created "patent thickets" that make it difficult for scientists to do genetic research and commercialize their results. Monopolies on genetic testing have raised prices and reduced patient options.

On Monday, the high court will hear arguments about whether to invalidate a Utah company's patents on two genes associated with breast cancer. But the legal challenge, spearheaded by the American Civil Liberties Union and the Public Patent Foundation, could have much broader implications. A decision could invalidate thousands of patents and free medical researchers and clinicians to practice medicine without interference from the patent system.

Life-or-death stakes

The ACLU has cast a Utah biotech company called Myriad Genetics as the villain in its campaign against gene patents. Almost two decades ago, the University of Utah (a defendant in the original lawsuit) sequenced two genes, called BRCA1 and BRCA2, that are associated with an elevated risk of breast cancer. The University patented their findings before eventually licensing them to Myriad. Since the company began using said patents, it has enjoyed a de facto monopoly over testing and research related to the genes. Currently, Myriad even has a monopoly on the implications of various genetic differences, though some people are trying to undercut that as well.

"When Myriad genetics began cracking down and closing labs, no one else could offer the test," said Ellen Matloff, a cancer genetic counselor in an ACLU-produced video. Researchers began to suspect that Myriad's test was giving false negatives for some mutations of the BRCA genes. But Matloff says that when she asked for permission to offer a supplemental test for patients who got a negative result from Myriad's test, she was told that doing so would violate Myriad's patent.

Full blog


ACLU Video  - The Fight To Take Back Our Genes


How a rogue appeals court wrecked the patent system

Federal Circuit Appeals Court marks 30 years of spreading the "patent gospel."

[Just17]

Almost two decades ago, the University of Utah (a defendant in the original lawsuit) sequenced two genes, called BRCA1 and BRCA2, that are associated with an elevated risk of breast cancer. The University patented their findings before eventually licensing them to Myriad.

.....  and therin lies the problem ...... and then they complain because Myriad also used the patent system in a way they did not appreciate .....

All patents on living things should be banned .....  plants, animals as well as humans.

Grant them copy protection on their specific process.

[trustytrev]

Hello,
        Just say some time in the future  someones genes mutate naturally to an identical match for the patented ones what would happen then.Perhaps they would have to be put down to stop the patent infringement or would the patent become void.I think it would be difficult to prove something like this had occurred naturally and the consequences could become quite complicated for someone finding themselves in such a position.The chances of such occurrences would increase if the patent practice became widespread as well.
trustytrev

[Old-Polack]

Federal Circuit Appeals Court marks 30 years of spreading the "patent gospel."

Impeach the lot of them, find them "obviously" guilty, then "obviously" hang them, in front of every practicing patent attorney in the country.

Problem solved!

[Just17]

drastic ......  but most likely effective .....   

[horusfalcon]

Desperate times require desperate measures.  This is what is wrong with a capitalism that thinks it rules the State - it twists everything to maximize profit.  Hopefully, the Supreme Court will act in the public interest for a change, and make some sorely needed adjustments to this Circuit's rulings over the years.  Otherwise, our patent system will remain the tilted-in-favor-of-the-big-boys mess it has been for so long now.  Wow... desperate times really do require desperate measures, huh?  (I'm hoping the Supreme Court will do us some good?!?  Now that's what I call desperate! )

I forget who said it, but it's oddly appropriate:  "Perpetual growth is the creed of the cancer cell." 

Oh, it was Dr. Paul Erlich, a Nobel winning physician and early immunology and cancer researcher.

Later ON,
D

[Wildman]

It was once a crime to "Practice" law in this country, see what happens when it is allowed 

[arkanabar]

Crony capitalism is why I favor strong common-law laissez-faire policies.  And let's face it, the whole government-labor union-big business evil triad has been stylish among big government, big labor, and big business for over 80 years.  What we actually need is independent, impartial courts and law enforcement that punish fraud, violence, and theft with restitution.  Allowing the state to interfere with businesses nearly always means that big businesses start buying legislators who then build or modify the regulatory environment to favor their patrons.