The forum discussion centers on public concerns regarding genetic research, specifically the patenting of genes by biologists. The invalidation of several gene patents by Judge Sweet in 2010, which he deemed “improperly granted” due to their basis in “law of nature,” highlights the ongoing legal and ethical debates surrounding genetic patents. Approximately 20 percent of human genes are patented, underpinning a multibillion-dollar industry reliant on these intellectual property rights. Despite the discussion being reignited by recent social media activity, the core issues date back to the publication of the human genome draft in 2000.
PREREQUISITESBiotechnologists, legal professionals in intellectual property, researchers in genetics, and policymakers interested in the intersection of science and law will benefit from this discussion.
Judge Sweet, however, ruled that the patents were “improperly granted” because they involved a “law of nature.” [..]
The case could have far-reaching implications. About 20 percent of human genes have been patented, and multibillion-dollar industries have been built atop the intellectual property rights that the patents grant.
Monique said:That story is 9 years old, talk about old news..
The discussion was sparked by the publishing of the first draft of the human genome in 2000. Recently several gene patents were invalidated in court: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/30/business/30gene.html"