Controversy Surrounding GMO Patents: Examining the Ethical Implications

  • Thread starter dgtech
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of patenting GMOs and the concerns surrounding it. The participants bring up the idea of claiming intellectual property over modified organisms and the potential consequences of this practice. They also mention the questionable tactics of some biotech companies and the laws and regulations surrounding GMO production and patents.
  • #1
dgtech
70
1
How should patenting a GMO be even a viable option? Claiming intellectual property over something you just modified seems absurd. Following that logic I could just rewrite a few lines of Hamlet and claim it as my intellectual property instead of Shakespeare's
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
Modified, in this context, means taking a Boeing 747 and inserting the genes from an another aircraft to give it the ability to hover or take-off vertically - that's patentable.
 
  • #3
So if I change Hamlet to a different outcome I can patent/copyright it as my own, despite I only modified a tiny fraction of it?

What about the fact companies like Monsanto produce GMOs that are sterile, but still can pollinate natural species over great distances, which is a threat to the natural biological diversity, plus they use this plague like tactic to infect natural crops and then unleash their lawyers with accusations farmers are illegally growing their crops, putting them out of business, instead of paying them compensation for contaminating their crops with strains that are sterile and pose health risks?
 
  • #4
I didn't say it was a good thing - I just said that GMO wasn't simply shuffling genes that already exist in the organism.
Plays aren't patented they are copyrighted - but yes you could modify and exiisting play to add new elements and copyright that new work.
 
  • #5
And there are no laws against such dangerous activity? GMO producers don't seem to be restrained by the law, they only seem to benefit from exploiting it...
 
  • #6
Is it the organism per se that's patented? Or the process to modify it?
 
  • #7
DaveC426913 said:
Is it the organism per se that's patented? Or the process to modify it?

Both, for a crop you can patent the new combination of genes - since they never existedin that form before you created them

A rather more dubious patent is for disease genes in humans, you can't patent the gene - since your parents 'invented' it and you can't patent it's operation or presence. So the companies patent the idea of a genetic test to discover disease X by looking at gene Y.
 
  • #8
DaveC426913 said:
Is it the organism per se that's patented? Or the process to modify it?

I'd say it's the actual gene that has been patented, so every organism containing it can be viewed as a patent violation.
 
  • #9
dgtech said:
So if I change Hamlet to a different outcome I can patent/copyright it as my own, despite I only modified a tiny fraction of it?

See Pride, Predjudice, and Zombies. The author took the text from Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, modified it, and now holds the copyright to his modified version.

What about the fact companies like Monsanto produce GMOs that are sterile, but still can pollinate natural species over great distances, which is a threat to the natural biological diversity, plus they use this plague like tactic to infect natural crops and then unleash their lawyers with accusations farmers are illegally growing their crops, putting them out of business, instead of paying them compensation for contaminating their crops with strains that are sterile and pose health risks?

Monsanto considered modifying their GMOs to be sterile, but ultimately decided against doing so because of harsh popular opinion against such measures (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_use_restriction_technology). If Monsanto had modified their GMOs to be sterile, we would presumably have less problems with GMO pollen cross-breeding with conventional strains in nearby fields.


And there are no laws against such dangerous activity? GMO producers don't seem to be restrained by the law, they only seem to benefit from exploiting it...

There certainly are many laws that regulate GMO producers, and they are overseen by many government agencies including the EPA, USDA, and FDA. GMO foods undergo much more stringent testing than any other food on the market. There are certainly laws on the patent side of things that biotech companies exploit, but what company doesn't exploit our patent system for profit (see software companies, "patent troll" companies, pharmaceuticals, etc)?
 

Related to Controversy Surrounding GMO Patents: Examining the Ethical Implications

1. What are GMO patents?

GMO patents are patents granted to companies or individuals for genetically modified organisms (GMOs). These patents give the patent holder exclusive rights to use, sell, and profit from the specific GMO they have created.

2. What is the controversy surrounding GMO patents?

The controversy surrounding GMO patents revolves around the ethical implications of granting exclusive rights to companies or individuals for something that is essential to our food supply. There are concerns about the monopolization of the food industry, the impact on farmers and consumers, and the potential negative effects on the environment and human health.

3. How are GMO patents obtained?

GMO patents are obtained through the process of patenting, which involves filing an application with the appropriate government agency and demonstrating that the GMO is novel, useful, and non-obvious. The patent is then granted if it meets all the necessary criteria.

4. Who benefits from GMO patents?

The main beneficiaries of GMO patents are the companies or individuals who hold the patents. They have exclusive rights to use and profit from the GMO, which can lead to significant financial gain. However, some argue that consumers also benefit from GMO patents through increased food production and potentially lower prices.

5. What are the ethical implications of GMO patents?

The ethical implications of GMO patents are complex and often debated. Some argue that they promote innovation and economic growth, while others argue that they lead to monopolies, unequal access to food, and potential harm to the environment and human health. There are also concerns about the impact on small farmers and the potential for exploitation of developing countries.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
3
Replies
73
Views
12K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
72
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
2
Views
945
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
25
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
Back
Top