Anchoring gene patent eligibility to its constitutional mooring

Chahine, Kenneth G.

doi:10.1038/nbt.1728

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…10−11). However, as Chahine points out, the “natural products doctrine” is itself vague and there has been “little consistency in the manner it has been applied” (Chahine, , p. 1251). Nevertheless, this early decision opened the way for subsequent courts to rule that “usefulness” and “human made inventions” trump the other criteria of patentability, a decision that favored large corporations like Myriad whose products are pure biotechnology.…”

Section: Legal Arguments Over the Patentability Of The Brca Genesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other works are primarily historical accounts of those gene patents and/or gene test patents (Williams‐Jones, ). Other works propose alternative regulatory and funding mechanisms (Chahine, ; Dreyfuss, ; Van Overwalle, ). Although much of the scholarship is critical of gene patents (Gold & Carbone, ; Koepsell, ; Schacht, ; Soini, Aymé, & Matthijs, ; Williams‐Jones, ), very few of these works really capture the “big picture.”…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The BRCA Gene Patents: Arguments Over Patentability and Social Utility

Chojnacki¹,

White²

2013

World Med & Health Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Beginning in 2011, a series of contradictory U.S. court decisions cast doubt on the patentability of Myriad Genetics' BRCA1 and BRCA2, the primary genes responsible for breast and ovarian cancer. Similar legal and political opposition materialized within the European Union, Great Britain, Canada, and the rest of the modern world. Despite years of global debate, the long‐term public policy implications for the BRCA gene patents—and indeed all gene patents—remain unclear. This essay will examine the two primary argument forms that have been presented in the BRCA gene patent debate: “patentability arguments” and “social utility arguments.” Neither line of argument has yielded much in terms of national or international consensus. But both have generated increasingly complex, convoluted, and ultimately irreconcilable debate within and between nations. These endless cycles of legal, political, and scholarly debate cast serious doubt upon the long‐term sustainability of the patent institution as a “one‐size‐fits‐all” funding mechanism for genomic science, the genomic industry, and genomic medicine.

show abstract

Section: Legal Arguments Over the Patentability Of The Brca Genesmentioning

confidence: 99%