Wednesday, March 31, 2010

Judge Rules Genes Can't Be Patented

IO9 reports that a judge recently ruled against the pharmaceutical industry stating that a company could not patent a human gene just because they discovered it.

From the article:
  • The ruling grew out of a suit brought by the ACLU and Public Patent Foundation against Myriad Genetics, Inc., which had a patent on a gene which can lead to breast cancer.
  • The ruling that could invalidate patents held on almost 20 percent of the human genome. There is a long-simmering debate within the biotech and scientific communities over whether it makes sense to patent genes. At this point, most scientists agree that patents on genes retard scientific innovation.
complete IO9 article


Dorn said...

What an absurd thought. Do they patent new species of animals/insects/plants? Well, maybe plants if they crossbred them.

Beam Me Up said...

Dorn, You bet they do. Grain stocks are the most common, but not far behind are the RDNA animals that do things like eat oil or toxic chemicals. Yeah, they are just microbes, but what about a meat producing animal? (read resnick's Old MacDonald had a Farm )
Crazier things have happened. At least with this ruling the judge may have halted the slide down a very slippery slope.