Abstract
The biotechnology industry has become firmly established over the past twenty years and gene patents have played an important part in this phenomenon. However, concerns have been raised over the patentability of human genetic material, through public protests and international statements, but to little effect. Here we discuss some of these concerns, the patent authorities' response to them, and ways in which to address these issues and to move the debate forward using current legal structures.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Rifkin, J. The Biotech Century (Penguin Putnam, New York, 1998 ).
American College of Medical Genetics, Position Statement on Gene Patents and Accessibility of Gene Testing (1999). www.faseb.org/genetics/acmg/pol-34.htm
Sarma, L. Biopiracy: Twentieth century imperialism in the form of international agreements . Temple International and Comparative Law Journal 13, 107–136 (1999).
Thomas, S. et al. Ownership of the human genome. Nature 380, 387–388 (1996).
Thomas, S. in The Commercialization of Genetic Research: Ethical, Legal and Policy Issues (eds Caulfield, T. Williams-Jones, B.) 55–62 (Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishing, New York, 1999 ).
Nau, J. Y. Brevetabilité des gènes humains: le comité d'éthique en désaccord avec la directive européenne. Le Monde 15 June (2000).
Kolata, G. Special Report: Who owns your genes? New York Times 15 May (2000).
Ramirez, A. School given patent to clone humans. National Post 16 May (2000).
Sagar, A., Daemmrich, A. & Ashiya, M. The tragedy of commoners: biotechnology and its publics . Nature Biotechnol. 18, 2– 4 (2000).
Angell, M. Is academic medicine for sale? N. Engl. J. Med. 20, 1516–1518 (2000).
Pottagem, A. The inscription of life in law: gene, patents, and bio-politics. The Modern Law Review 61, 740–765 (1998).
Gold, E. R. Body Parts: Property Rights and the Ownership of Human Biological Materials (Georgetown Univ. Press, Washington DC, 1996).
Caulfield, T. & Gold, E. R. Whistling in the wind: reframing the genetic patent debate. Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy 15, 75–79 ( 2000).
Ernst and Young's Fourth Report on the Canadian Biotechnology Industry. Can. Biotechol. '97: Coming of Age (Ernst and Young, 1997).
President and Fellows of Harvard v. Commissioner of Patents (August 3, 2000) No. A-334–398 (Fed. Crt of Appeals).
Nottingham, S. Eat Your Genes (St. Martin's, New York, 1999).
Roberts, T. Why not patent plants? Patent World 113, 14–16 (1999).
Schehr, R. & Fox, J. Human genome bombshell. Nature Biotechnol. 18, 365 (2000 ).
Marcus, A. Owning a gene: patent pending. Nature Med. 2, 728–729 (1996).
Nelkin, D. & Andrews, L. Homo economicus: Commercialization of body tissue in the age of biotechnology. Hastings Center Report 28, 30–39 ( 1998).
Heller, M. & Eisenberg, R. Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science 280 , 698–701 (1998).
Knoppers, B. M. Status, sale and patenting of human genetic material: an international survey . Nature Genet. 22, 23– 26 (1999).
Bunk, S. Researchers feel threatened by disease gene patents. The Scientist 13, 7 (1999)
Academy of Clinical Laboratory Physicians and Scientists. ACLPS Resolution: Exclusive Licenses for Diagnostic Tests Approved by the ACLPS Executive Council 06/03/99 (1999). http://depts.washington.edu/labweb.aclps/license/htm
Cho, M. K. in Preparing for the Millennium: Laboratory Medicine in the 21st Century, December 4–5, 1998, 2nd edn 47–53 (AACC, Washington DC, 1998).
Caulfield, T. & Gold, E. R. Genetic testing, ethical concerns, and the role of patent law. Clin. Genet. 57, 370–375 (2000).
Bruzzone, L. The research exemption: a proposal. Am. Intell. Prop. Law Assoc. QL 21, 52 (1993).
Parker, D. Patent infringement exemptions for life science research. Houston J. Intl Law 16, 615 (1994).
Gold, E. R. in Commercialization of Genetic Research: Ethical, Legal and Policy Issues (eds Caulfield, T. & Williams–Jones, B.) 63– 78 (Plenum, New York, 1999).
Schissel, A., Merz, J. F. & Cho, M. K. Survey confirms fear about licensing of genetic tests . Nature 402, 118 ( 1999).
Blumenthal, D. et al. Withholding Research Results in Academic Life Science: Evidence From a National Survey of Faculty J. Am. Med. Assoc. 277, 1224 (1997).
Caulfield, T. The commercialization of human genetics: a discussion of issues relevant to Canadian consumers. J. Consumer Policy 21, 483–526 (1998).
Packer, K. & Webster, A. Patenting culture in science: reinventing the scientific wheel of credibility. Science, Technology and Human Values 21, 425–445 ( 1996).
Blumenthal, D. Academic–industry relationships in the life sciences. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 268, 3344 (1992 ).
Straus, J. Intellectual property issues in genome research. Genome Digest 3, 1–2 (1996 ).
Barton, J. Reforming the patent system. Science 287, 1933–1934 (2000).
United States Patent and Trade Mark Office. Interim Utility Guidelines (1999).
Holtzman, N. Are genetic tests adequately regulated? Science 286 , 409 (1999).
Kodish, E. Commentary: Risks and benefits, testing and screening, cancer, genes and dollars . J. Law Med. Ethics 25, 252– 255 (1997).
Brower, V. News: Testing, testing, testing? Nature Med. 3, 131–132 (1997).
Weiss, R. Genetic testing's human toll. Washington Post 21 July (1999).
Cowan, D. Tort liability of patentee licensors. J. Patent Office Soc. 64, 87–104 (1982).
Le Saux, O. et al. Mutations in a gene encoding an ABC transporter cause pseudoxanthoma elasticum. Nature Genet. 25, 223– 227 (2000).
Smaglik, P. Tissue donors use their influence in deal over gene patent terms. Nature 407, 821 (2000).
Human Genome Organization Ethics Committee. Genetic benefit sharing. Science 290, 49 (2000).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Related links
Related links
DATABASE LINKS
FURTHER INFORMATION
American College of Medical Genetics
Unesco's 1997 Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights
United States Supreme court case of Diamond versus Chakrabarty
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Caulfield, T., Gold, E. & Cho, M. Patenting human genetic material: refocusing the debate. Nat Rev Genet 1, 227–231 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1038/35042087
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/35042087
This article is cited by
-
Not quite a myriad of gene patents
Nature Biotechnology (2013)
-
It’s About Scientific Secrecy, Dummy: A Better Equilibrium Among Genomics Patenting, Scientific Research and Health Care
Science and Engineering Ethics (2012)
-
Changing the rules of the game: addressing the conflict between free access to scientific discovery and intellectual property rights
Nature Biotechnology (2010)
-
Human dignity: a guide to policy making in the biotechnology era?
Nature Reviews Genetics (2006)
-
Shaping science policy in the age of genomics
Nature Reviews Genetics (2004)