LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Current position of legislative approaches to the grant of patent law on isolated human genes
More details
Hide details
Submission date: 2017-12-21
Final revision date: 2018-06-06
Acceptance date: 2018-06-27
Publication date: 2018-09-30
Medical Studies 2018;34(3):264-266
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Studies in biomedicine and gene engineering have showed their tremendous potential for diagnostics and treating, incurable, until now, diseases. However, the potential carried by information encoded in DNA confronts the moral, ethical and legal oppositions, which state that human genetic material should not be the object of the patent. The international guidelines for patentability and their application to biotechnology around the world propose three key criteria: novelty, inventiveness, and usefulness. However, when dealing with patenting separate genes and sequences of human genes ethical issues and requirements for relevance to morality and human dignity come into play. The purpose of this article was to review some important legal and doctrinal aspects of gene and DNA patenting in the core countries, particularly the USA and the European Union. EU approach to legal regulations of founding and practical application of biotech inventions seems to be more sensitive to ethical requirements and human dignity.
REFERENCES (17)
1.
Jensen K, Murray F. Intellectual property. Enhanced: intellectual property landscape of the human genome. Science 2005; 310: 239-240.
2.
U.S. Constitution, Art. 1, Sec.8, Par. 8. “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries”.
3.
Samantha A, Jameson. A comparison of the patentability and patent scope of biotechnological inventions in the United States and the European Union. American Intellectual Property Law 2009; 35: 193-202.
4.
The Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. The Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine, Oviedo, 1997.
5.
Supreme court of the United States, Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, no. 12-398, 2013.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/o....
8.
Ghidini G. Rethinking Law. Rethinking Intellectual Property. Balancing Conflicts of interest in the Constitutional Paradigm. Edward Elgas Publishing, Inc., 2018.
9.
Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, Oviedo, 4.IV.1997.
10.
Hawkins N. Human gene patents and genetic testing in Europe: a reappraisal. Scripted 2010; 7: 453-473.
11.
World Health Organization. Report of the intergovernmental working group on public health, innovation and intellectual property. World Health Organization 2008.
12.
Jasanoff S. Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press 2011.
13.
NIH Public Access, David B. Resnik. Embryonic Stem Cell Patents and Human Dignity. Health Care Anal. 2007; 15: 211-222.
14.
Rogers EJ. Can you patent genes? Yes and no. J Pat Trademark Off Soc 2010; 93, 19.
15.
Singh KK. Biotechnology and Intellectual Property Rights. Legal and Social Implications 2015.
16.
The Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees, Bomann-Larsen L. Research ethics and patents, 2016.