On the Patentability of Human Genes: Based on the Principle of Equal and Shared Benefits

Xuelei WANG

Abstract


In the Myriad case, the US Supreme Court considered the BRAC gene to be a “natural product”, thereby denying its patentability, but in reality, it did not resolve the debate over whether the gene was “discovered” or “invented.”. To avoid such unnecessary debates, the recognition of human gene patents should not blindly adhere to the traditional recognition model of patent objects. It should be examined from the perspective of the purpose of the patent system and balancing the interests of all parties, avoiding the excessive cutting of basic knowledge by immature knowledge, and reasonably limiting the scope of gene patent objects.


Keywords


Gene patent rights; Discovery; Invention; Equal and shared benefits

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bao, N. J., Wu, J., & Wang, F. (2015). Thoughts on gene patentability triggered by the patent case of breast cancer related genes BRAC1 and BRAC2. China Medical Biotechnology, 2015(5), 473.

Cao, L. (2013). On the legitimacy of gene patents and analysis of substantive requirements for gene patent authorization in the United States from the Myriad case. Chinese Journal of Biotechnology, 2013(1), 130-131.

Chen, W. Y. (1998). Exploring the response of China’s patent system to the development of biotechnology from the application of human genome sequence patent by NIH in the United States. Journal of Law, Chung Cheng University, 1998(1), 18.

Cui, G. B. (2000). Patent protection and benefit sharing of genetic technology (pp. 240-344). China University of Political Science and Law Press.

Fan, J. D., Hong, Z. X., & Hou, M. (2015). On the development and evaluation of gene patent practice. Legal Review of National Chengchi University, 2015(3), 405.

Fury, D. (2007). Knowledge economics (Y. F. Zhou, Trans., pp.176-180). Tianxia Yuanjian Publishing House.

Hao, J. M. (2013). A brief discussion on the human gene patent case and its impact of the United States Supreme Court. Chinese Inventions and Patents, 2013(11), 85.

He, H. (2013). The redefinition of “discovery” and “invention”. Intellectual Property, 2013(9), 29.

Li, S. H. (2011). Patent protection and scope of rights for genetic research achievements: The impact of gene patent rights on public health from recent cases in the United States and Europe. Biennial Journal of Technology Development and Legal Norms, 2011, 79-84.

Li, Z. (2014). By AMP v. Myriad Genetics, The suitability of gene patents in the Inc. case. Intellectual Property Review, 2014(2), 33.

Li, Z. A. (2014). By AMP v. Myriad Genetics, The suitability of gene patents in the Inc. case. Intellectual Property Review, 2014(2), 33.

Liu, F., Zhu, S. Y., & Wei, Z. (2014). Exploring the patentability and interest balance of natural genes. Chinese Inventions and Patents, 2014(5), 13.

Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289, 1302, 1305 (2012).

Qi, Z. (2006). A case of opening the door to genetic technology patents - A case study of Diamond v Analysis of the Chakrabarty case. Medicine and Philosophy, 2006(6), 55.

Shen, Z. Y. (2012). Patentability and eligibility of genes - Starting from the Myriad case. Law of the World, 2012(2), 56.

Sturges, M. L. (1997). Who should hold property rights to the human genome? An application of the common heritage of humankind. AMUILR, 13, 219-248.

Zhang, P. (2012). On the “Industrial Policy Principles” of Intellectual Property System. Journal of Peking University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2012(3), 121-132.

Zhao, X. (2014). Equal sharing of interests in gene patents - From the perspective of Myriad case. Ethical Research, 2014(2), 95.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/13453

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 Canadian Social Science

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Reminder

  • How to do online submission to another Journal?
  • If you have already registered in Journal A, then how can you submit another article to Journal B? It takes two steps to make it happen:

1. Register yourself in Journal B as an Author

  • Find the journal you want to submit to in CATEGORIES, click on “VIEW JOURNAL”, “Online Submissions”, “GO TO LOGIN” and “Edit My Profile”. Check “Author” on the “Edit Profile” page, then “Save”.

2. Submission

Online Submission: http://cscanada.org/index.php/css/submission/wizard

  • Go to “User Home”, and click on “Author” under the name of Journal B. You may start a New Submission by clicking on “CLICK HERE”.
  • We only use four mailboxes as follows to deal with issues about paper acceptance, payment and submission of electronic versions of our journals to databases: caooc@hotmail.com; office@cscanada.net; ccc@cscanada.net; ccc@cscanada.org

 Articles published in Canadian Social Science are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).

 

Canadian Social Science Editorial Office

Address: 1020 Bouvier Street, Suite 400, Quebec City, Quebec, G2K 0K9, Canada.
Telephone: 1-514-558 6138 
Website: Http://www.cscanada.net; Http://www.cscanada.org 
E-mail:caooc@hotmail.com; office@cscanada.net

Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture