RSS
Myriad Appeals, Says Gene Patents Should Be Allowed
from the but-of-course dept
This will come as no surprise to anyone, but Myriad Genetics has officially appealed the ruling that invalidated gene patents. As you may recall, earlier this year, a court noted that genes are unpatentable, noting that they "are directed to a law of nature and were therefore improperly granted."
Myriad is appealing on two points. First, it's claiming that the people who sued have no standing, because there's no controversy since the company hadn't taken any action against the plaintiffs. That seems like a pretty weak argument, given that Myriad had made it clear that it would enforce its patents against anyone else who tried to do research or genetic testing on the specific BRCA1/2 genes. Second, Myriad is claiming that the patents are valid, because it connected not just the gene (which is unpatentable), but the isolated gene combined with the information that this mutation predicts breat and ovarian cancer (also, unpatentable by itself). Basically, Myriad is suggesting that tying two unpatentable things together make this patentable. That makes little sense, and hopefully the appeals court sees through it as quickly as the district court did.
Myriad is appealing on two points. First, it's claiming that the people who sued have no standing, because there's no controversy since the company hadn't taken any action against the plaintiffs. That seems like a pretty weak argument, given that Myriad had made it clear that it would enforce its patents against anyone else who tried to do research or genetic testing on the specific BRCA1/2 genes. Second, Myriad is claiming that the patents are valid, because it connected not just the gene (which is unpatentable), but the isolated gene combined with the information that this mutation predicts breat and ovarian cancer (also, unpatentable by itself). Basically, Myriad is suggesting that tying two unpatentable things together make this patentable. That makes little sense, and hopefully the appeals court sees through it as quickly as the district court did.
I’m looking for research...
Apps, Platforms, Consumer Use
Innovate More. Code Less: Optimizing Open-Source Utilization
I have an app...
Marketing And Monetization Strategies For Free Apps
Top 5 Reasons Why Mobile Analytics Is Important
I have a business...
The Future Of Commerce Will Combine Your Social Network And Mobile Device
How To Successfully Get Your App Into China
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Absolutely It Should Be Patentable
Put it this way: think of each thing as a dried pea. Look at each one, and it looks like nothing more and nothing less than a dried pea—it’s “obvious” that’s what they are. But put two of those dried peas next to each other, and from some angles one pea obscures the other, and so it’s no longer “obvious” that you can see the other pea. That’s where the invention comes in—in choosing the right angle from which to view the peas.
And all we’re saying the courts should do, is to give these Myriad’s peas a chance.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Absolutely It Should Be Patentable
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Nina Paley
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
If genes are no longer able to have patent protection
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Take the Monsanto approach!
If Monsanto can do it with seeds, I'm sure Myriad can do it with genes.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Where Will the Liability End?
So if a company like Myraid and Monsanto insist that they have a property right to genes for the purpose of extorting revenue, they should also be liable for the damages caused by the "escape" of their so-called property.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Where Will the Liability End?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Absolutely It Should Be Patentable
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Where Will the Liability End?
I then don't suppose Monsanto would accept the cost of having their seeds or grown plants returned to them!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
change
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Absolutely It Should Be Patentable
So giving "Myriad's peas a chance" is not an option.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Absolutely It Should Be Patentable
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: change
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Absolutely It Should Be Patentable
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: If genes are no longer able to have patent protection
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Breat cancer?????
I know you got a lot on your plate Mike, so this is a gentle reminder to use the spell check.
Interesting article otherwise
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Nina Paley
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Nina Paley
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
However I do believe virtually all for profit business should be forced to adopt a sliding scale pricing model that would allow everyone to access the technology.
Don't bother flaming me and saying thats socialism.......I call your bullshit right now. What it is, is a fair and reasonable solution that allows companies to continue to make some form of profit from their work while insuring those who find themselves economically disadvantaged have access to everything their society can offer them.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment