CGS : Patents & Other IP

About Patents, Other Intellectual Property & Human Biotechnology

Human biotechnology is both constrained and catalyzed by intellectual property law, which regulates who can use certain information, ideas, and processes. Patents—one form of intellectual property—give the holder an exclusive right to produce and sell an invention.

While patents provide an incentive to inventors, they can also inhibit information flow. Their management has a tremendous impact on how biotechnologies are developed, and who benefits from them.

In the United States, the development of biotechnology has been dramatically influenced by two developments in 1980 that greatly increased the incentives for the commercialization of the life sciences. Congress passed the Bayh-Dole Act, which reformed how inventions from federally-funded research are managed. The same year, the Supreme Court ruled in Diamond v. Chakrabarty that living things, including genes, could be patented.

Angelina Jolie and the One Percentby Gayle Sulik, Scientific AmericanMay 20th, 2013Since the Angelina Jolie story broke, there’s been a flurry of discussion, but we should remember an important caveat about her situation: it doesn’t apply to most women.

Angelina Jolie and the Fate of Breast Cancer Genes[Quotes CGS's Marcy Darnovsky]by Alexandra Le Tellier, Los Angeles TimesMay 14th, 2013Angelina Jolie described her double mastectomy as a way to gain control over mutations in her "breast cancer genes," but how much control we have over BRCA1 and BRCA2, and human genes in general, is yet to be determined.

Patenting Parthenotes: High Court Asks if Parthenotes are 'Human Embryos' Under the Biotech Directiveby Antony Blackburn-Starza, BioNewsApril 29th, 2013The UK's High Court has asked the Court of Justice of the European Union to clarify if human parthenotes fall under the definition of a human embryo for the purposes of patentability.

In Australia, Gene Patents Also Subject of High Court Struggleby Leigh Dayton, ScienceApril 19th, 2013Australia's Full Federal Court has begun proceedings in an appeal of an earlier decision that upheld the validity of breast cancer diagnostic tests developed by Myriad Genetics.

Supreme Court Hears Gene Patent Case; Activists Rally on Courthouse Stepsby Pete Shanks, Biopolitical TimesApril 18th, 2013The justices heard arguments in the Myriad gene patent case, and seemed critical of the patents but perhaps unwilling to make a broad ruling.

Can Human Genes Be Patented?by Eliot Marshall, ScienceApril 17th, 2013The question has been debated for years but not addressed directly by the U.S. Supreme Court—until this week. The decision, expected later this year and from which there is no appeal, could have an impact on hundreds of companies and thousands of researchers.

Panel Discusses the Legality of Patenting Human Genes [VIDEO][With CGS's Marcy Darnovsky] China Central TelevisionApril 16th, 2013Discussion of the Supreme Court hearing on human gene patents with intellectual property attorney Geoffrey Karny and CGS's Marcy Darnovsky, hosted by Mike Walter.

Supreme Court Critical of Patents on Human Genesby David G. Savage, Los Angeles TimesApril 15th, 2013The justices were highly skeptical of the idea that a company or a scientist can hold a patent on human genes and prevent others from testing or using them.

Who should own DNA? All of us[Op-Ed]by Marcy Darnovsky and Karuna Jaggar, Los Angeles TimesApril 12th, 2013You can't patent the sun; why should you be able to patent human genes?

Can We Patent Life?by Michael Specter, The New YorkerApril 2nd, 2013Jonas Salk would not be amused, but if the Supreme Court buys Myriad’s argument, the sun, along with the carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen contained within it, will indeed be up for grabs, and so will every gene in our bodies.

Displaying 1-10 of 276
Next >>
Last Page »
« Show Complete List »

ESPAÑOL | PORTUGUÊS | Русский