U.S. Says Genes Should Not Be Eligible for Patents

[andym]

Source: New York Times

Reversing a longstanding policy, the federal government said on Friday that human and other genes should not be eligible for patents because they are part of nature. The new position could have a huge impact on medicine and on the biotechnology industry.

The new position was declared in a friend-of-the-court brief filed by the Department of Justice late Friday in a case involving two human genes linked to breast and ovarian cancer.

“We acknowledge that this conclusion is contrary to the longstanding practice of the Patent and Trademark Office, as well as the practice of the National Institutes of Health and other government agencies that have in the past sought and obtained patents for isolated genomic DNA,” the brief said.

..............

“It’s major when the United States, in a filing, reverses decades of policies on an issue that everyone has been focused on for so long,” said Edward Reines, a patent attorney who represents biotechnology companies.


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/30/business/30drug.html?src=busln

---

Looks like big Pharma might not be too happy with the Obama adminstration over this position...

[aquart]

1. I'm happy and that's what really matters.

[Joe Chi Minh]

2. Sanity at last. Who can doubt that they would patent the air we breathe if they could.

The very thing Thatcher was accused by a Labour parliamentarian of being liable to do next - after she had privatised the water supply.

[truthisfreedom]

29. Hey, that's an interesting idea.

I gotta talk to my patent attorney about that.

[arcane1]

3. Great news!!!

I'll definitely be following this development, it's one of my biggest peeves! :)

[NV Whino]

4. Good news

Now how are they going to find a way around it, I wonder.

[mrs_p]

5. what the hell does this even mean?

"Proponents say genes isolated from the body are chemicals that are different from those found in the body and therefore are eligible for patents." What absolute bullshit - the gene came from the body - all they did was USE chemicals to amplify and sequence it.

I hope this means actual changes for science and will include genes from prokaryotes and viruses as well.

[saras]

6. Why?

Why do I have the sneaking suspicion that this has more to with other countries outrunning our science and patenting more than we are, and not so much to do with them getting the principles?

It's a positive step none the less.

I had previously had the thought, but not the ambition, to organize a foundation that would collect genes, human and otherwise, and release them under a Creative Commons license for nonprofit use only.

[dipsydoodle]

7. About time too

:thumbsup:

[Owl]

8. ABSOLUTELY SANITY at LAST!

[Zenlitened]

9. Puzzling. - n/t

[snot]

10. K&R'd

[joshcryer]

11. Holy shit, maybe this will invalidate all biotech patents now.

[boppers]

16. Nope, just ones that don't involve modification.

These weren't patents on a biotech process, product, or novel organism, this was an attempt to patent naturally occurring genetic variations.

[Posteritatis]

26. I'm comparatively okay with "I want to patent this gene I actually made" type patents

The fact that one fifth of you is patented, I'm rather less okay with.

[avaistheone1]

12. Does this mean Monsanto's bogus patents on seeds are now invalid?

Hope so.


k&r

[Posteritatis]

27. The claim's specific to unmodified, naturally-occuring ones

A gene that's not naturally occurring because it was created or modified one way or another wouldn't fall under the argument in the OP. So a lot of Monsanto's patents would survive, though the companies that patented large swathes of the human genome are at risk of losing theirs.

[varelse]

13. It's about f'ckn time, too

[defendandprotect]

14. Nor should food seeds .... Monsanto should be held liable for damage done....

Public has a right to everything natural -- and the right not to have them

tampered with --

Bring on the marijuana -- !!

[JTFrog]

15. K&R!

[SteveG]

17. One word.... YES! (nt)

nt

[arikara]

18. K&R

This is a welcome step in the right direction. Monsatan will not be happy.

[Odin2005]

19. YAAAAAAAY!!!

:woohoo:

[eilen]

20. Wooo hooo! Suck it Monsanto!!! nt

[Hekate]

21. Great. It's a start.

:bounce:

[maryf]

22. Point for the people!

what's to happen to patents in existence?

[druidity33]

23. We'll see how well this holds up

to the attacks it will see from Monsanto and "the industries" this would affect...

:shrug:

[lovuian]

24. this is about Europe and the other countries were

opposing the Monsanto GMO agenda taking over their food supply

The United States is catching up

but the light is shining that FINALLY the DEPT of JUSTICE
realized you can't patent NATURE which has been here for tens of thousands of years

[Cleobulus]

25. I always thought discovery patents made no sense, might as well patent...

all other discoveries.

Patents are for inventions, not discoveries.

[TheMadMonk]

28. This could be not much more than a bone tossed in our direction.

More and more research is showing that most genetic disease markers are only weak indicators at best. The foreseen lucrative market in genetic assaying has just tanked anyway.