Biotechnology ruling: Federal judge says cancer DNA in genes can't be patented

[AnOhioan]

Source: Associated Press

A judge struck down a company's patents Monday on two genes linked to an increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer in a ruling that was being closely watched in the medical research community.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Sweet challenging whether anyone can hold patents on human genes was expected to have broad implications for the biotechnology industry and genetics-based medical research.

Sweet said he invalidated the patents because DNA's existence in an isolated form does not alter the fundamental quality of DNA as it exists in the body nor the information it encodes.

He rejected arguments that it was acceptable to grant patents on DNA sequences as long as they are claimed in the form of "isolated DNA."

Read more: http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2010/03/biotechnology_ruling_federal_j.html

[arcane1]

1. SWEET!!!!

This has been a pet peeve of mine for some time now :)

[Duer 157099]

4. Me too. As if they invented the sequence. Why not patent words too?

The whole topic of IP is difficult.

[liberation]

7. Nothing difficult about it...

It should only be considered "intellectual property" if you came up with it (i.e. you created something). Genes are not someone's invention, since we're proof of the previous art for crying out loud.


This nonsense with corporations trying to patent nature, is what happens when one takes capitalism to its ultimate insane consequences. Time to evolve already I say...

[Wizard777]

8. That is also my basic understanding of patent law.

You cannot get a patent on anything that is naturally occurring. I think it was a gum company that once tried to obtain a patent for Spearmint. The patent was denied because Spearmint was a naturally occurring substance that they did not invent. But if they did get the patent they would essentially own the flavor and smell of spearmint.

[Posteritatis]

10. Now they just need to enforce that - about one quarter of your genes are patented. (nt)

[truedelphi]

11. Does this mean we can undo all the tens of thousands

of patents that Monsanto and other GMO Frankenstein foods people now hold on things like corn, maize, wheat, rice, etc?

In one example, Monsanto took a type of maize that the Mexican Native peoples had grown for millenia, and patented it to the point that pe4ople in this nation were not allowed to grow it.

[Posteritatis]

14. They like forcing people to grow the stuff accidentally, too

Fun stuff like "accidentally" pollinating Canadian fields over the border with patented strains and then suing the farmers. If they actually altered a strain substantially, then sure, they can patent it, but that sort of extortion crosses more lines than the one on the border.

[cstanleytech]

15. It would depend I assume on how they went about creating them.

Offhand I wouldnt get my hopes up on those patents being thrown out.

[Jefferson23]

17. Oh how I wish that were possible to undo. n/t

[harmonicon]

16. *ahem* PM me to ask where to send the cheque.

I own "invented", "words", and "too". You may never use those words(tm) again!

[Thor_MN]

23. By collecting royalties, the guy that invented "Happily ever after" lived OK, for awhile.

[myrna minx]

2. K&R n/t

[sailor65]

3. Crichton had it right......

"Next"

Lots of eerie parallels.

[rbixby]

5. So wait....

If you get breast cancer, they could sue you for patent infringement if they could do this?

[Dr. Strange]

6. No...

but if some company were studying that genome looking for a cure, they would have to pay whomever owns the patent. (Which wouldn't be very conducive to research, if you ask me.)

[Posteritatis]

9. No, but they could potentially sue the people diagnosing you

Especially if the diagnosis involves looking at the gene or other markers in a nonapproved way.

[tomm2thumbs]

12. thank-for-god-fucks-sake!

these idiots think they can own the human genome just because they got a good look at it.

In that case, construction workers would own everyone's asses!

[mike_c]

13. this is excellent news, especially for the academic research community....

I'm so tired of seeing economic considerations drive research agendas in academia. Not nearly to the extent of corporate research, but still. Business has no place in academic labs, IMO.

[derby378]

18. Judge Invalidates Human Gene Patent

Source: New York Times

A federal judge on Monday struck down patents on two genes linked to breast and ovarian cancer. The decision, if upheld, could throw into doubt the patents covering thousands of human genes and reshape the law of intellectual property.

United States District Court Judge Robert W. Sweet issued the 152-page decision, which invalidated seven patents related to the genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, whose mutations have been associated with cancer.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the Public Patent Foundation at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York joined with individual patients and medical organizations to challenge the patents last May: they argued that genes, products of nature, fall outside of the realm of things that can be patented. The patents, they argued, stifle research and innovation and limit testing options.

Myriad Genetics, the company that holds the patents with the University of Utah Research Foundation, asked the court to dismiss the case, claiming that the work of isolating the DNA from the body transforms it and makes it patentable. Such patents, it said, have been granted for decades; the Supreme Court upheld patents on living organisms in 1980. In fact, many in the patent field had predicted the courts would throw out the suit.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/business/30gene.html?hpw

---

Thanks to DUer steven johnson for finding this first.

[msongs]

19. i do NOT give permission to anyone to patent MY genes. good for this judge keeping the

corporate scum away from controlling humanity.

Msongs

[SPedigrees]

20. Ditto. Let's hope the decision does not get overturned. nt

[Posteritatis]

21. Next, we need to deal with the other few thousand of your genes that are patented

I'm ecstatic at finally seeing this ruling though.

[im1013]

22. NOW we need to...

do something about those Monsanto bastards!!!


:grr::grr::grr:

[OneBlueSky]

24. patenting ANY life form (including seeds) should be outlawed! . . . n/t

.

[BlueIris]

25. Nice. Hopefully, this will make it easier for scientists to research potential treatments. nt