Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Commentary
  • Published:

Status, sale and patenting of human genetic material: an international survey

Nature Genetics volume 22, pages 23–26 (1999)Cite this article

Abstract

Following a decade of debate, the European Directive on the Legal Protection of Biotechnological Inventions1 was adopted by the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union on July 6, 1998. The Directive constitutes a legal and social policy landmark in biotechnology, taking an explicit position on the contentious issue of the patentability of higher life forms. It fails, however, to provide definitive statements on the legal status of human genetic material or the possibility of personal financial gain in relation to such material. An overview of the international, regional and national positions (as found in laws and official policy statements) on the status, commodification and patentability of human genetic material indicates that, although the Directive represents a consolidation of opinions, many issues remain unresolved.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions. J. Officiel L213 (1998).

  2. Knoppers, B.M., Hirtle, M., Lormeau, S., Laberge, C. & Laflamme, M. Control of DNA samples and information. Genomics 50, 385–401 ( 1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights (UNESCO, International Bioethics Committee, Paris, 1997).

  4. Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues Committee statement on the principled conduct of genetic research. Genome Dig. 3, 2–3 (1996).

  5. Latin American Human Genome Program (PLAGH) Declaration of Manzanillo. Int. Dig. Hlth Leg. 48, 424 –426 (1997).

  6. European Commission, Working Group on the Ethical, Social and Legal Aspects of Human Genome Analysis, Report of 31 December 1991, (WG-ESLA). Bull. Med. Ethics 19– 20 (1993).

  7. World Medical Association Declaration on the Human Genome Project. Int. Dig. Hlth Leg. 44, 150–152 (1993).

  8. FIGO Committee for the Study of Ethical Aspects of Human Reproduction recommendations on ethical issues in obstetrics and gynaecology—patenting human genes. Int. Dig. Hlth Leg. 48, 447–448 (1997).

  9. First South-North human genome conference declaration on patenting of human DNA sequences. Int. Dig. Hlth Leg. 44, 362–363 (1993).

  10. Marshall, E. DNA studies challenge the meaning of race. Science 282, 654–655 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Juengst, E. Group identity and human diversity: keeping biology straight. from culture Am. J. Hum. Genet. 63, 673– 677 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Baslar, K. The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Knoppers, B.M. Human Dignity and Genetic Heritage (Law Reform Commission of Canada, Ottawa, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Proposed International Guidelines on Ethical Issues in Medical Genetics and Genetic Services (World Health Organization, Geneva, 1998).

  15. International Ethics Committee Statement on DNA Sampling: Control and Access (HUGO, London, 1998).

  16. Council of Europe. Recommendation no18 R92 (3) on genetic testing and screening for health purposes. Int. Dig. Hlth Leg. 43, 284–289 ( 1992).

  17. American Society of Human Genetics, Social Issues Committee, professional disclosure of familial genetic information. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 62, 474–483 (1998).

  18. Genetic Screening: Ethical Issues (Nuffield Council on Bioethics, London, 1993).

  19. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Information Paper 5 (Privacy Commissioner of Australia, Commonwealth of Australia, 1996).

  20. Japan Society of Human Genetics Guidelines for Genetic Testing Using DNA Analysis. Eubios J. Asian Int. Bioethics 6, 137 (1996).

  21. Heredity: Science and Society (Committee of the Health Council of the Netherlands, The Hague, 1989 ).

  22. Control of Hereditary Diseases (World Health Organization, Geneva, 1996).

  23. Council of Europe. Convention for the protection of human rights and dignity of the human being with regard to the application of biology and medicine: convention on human rights and biomedicine. Int. Dig. Hlth Leg. 48, 99–105 (1997).

  24. Council of Europe. Recommendation R(90)3 on medical research on human beings. Int. Dig. Hlth Leg. 41, 461 (1990).

  25. Ethical Aspects of Human Tissue Banking, European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (European Commission, Brussels,1998).

  26. American College of Medical Genetics. Statement on storage and use of genetic material. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 57, 1499–1500 (1995).

  27. Code of Practice and Guidance on Human Genetic Testing Services Supplied Direct to the Public (Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing, London, 1997).

  28. Statement of WHO Expert Advisory Group on Ethical Issues in Medical Genetics p. 5 (World Health Organization, Geneva, 1998).

  29. Group of advisors ethical aspects of the patenting of inventions involving elements of human origin. Int. Dig. Hlth Leg. 48, 423–424 ( 1997).

  30. Knoppers, B.M. Biotechnology: sovereignty and sharing. in The Commercialization of Genetic Research: Ethical, Legal and Policy Issues (eds Caulfield, T. & Williams-Jones, B.) (Plenum, New York, in press).

  31. Eisenberg, R. Do EST patents matter? Trends Genet. 14, 379–381 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Heller, M. & Eisenberg, R. Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science 280 , 698–701 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Service, R.F. Will patent fights hold DNA chips hostage? Science 282, 397 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Statement on Gene Patenting (International Council of Scientific Unions, 1992).

  35. HUGO Position Statement on cDNAs: Patents (HUGO, London, 1992).

  36. HUGO statement on patenting of DNA sequences. Genome Dig. 2, 6–9 ( 1995).

  37. HUGO statement on patenting issues related to early release of raw sequence data. Genome Dig. 4, 3 (1997).

  38. World Medical Association Declaration on the Human Genome Project. Int. Dig. Hlth. Leg. 44, 150–152 (1993).

  39. Biotechnology, Patents and Morality (ed. Sterckx, S.) (Ashgate, Suffolk, 1997).

  40. Merz, J.F. et al. Disease gene patenting is a bad innovation. Mol. Diagnosis 2, 299 (1997).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. European Commission. Working Group on the Ethical, Social and Legal Aspects of Human Genome Analysis, (1991), Report of 31 December 1991 (WG-ESLA). Bull. Med. Ethics 19– 20 (1993).

  42. Law Reform Commission of Canada, Procurement and Transfer of Human Tissues and Organs, Working Paper 66 (Minister of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa, 1992).

  43. Biotechnology Related to Human Beings, Report No. 25 (1992–1993) to the Storting on Biotechnology Related to Human Beings (Ministry of Social Affairs, Oslo, 1993).

  44. Human Genetics: The Science and Its Consequences, Committee Office (Science and Technology Committee, House of Commons, London, 1995).

  45. Patenting Human Genes—A Report (Danish Council of Ethics, Copenhagen, 1994).

  46. Law No. 94-654 on the donation and use of elements and products of the human body, medically assisted procreation, and prenatal diagnosis. Int. Dig. Hlth Leg. 45, 473– 482 (1994).

  47. Pottage, A. The inscription of life in law: genes, patents and bio-politics. Modern Law Review 61, 740–765 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Black, J. Regulation as facilitation: negotiating the genetic revolution. Modern Law Review 61, 621–660 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Genetics and Society Project, Centre de droit recherche en droit public, Faculté de Droit, Université de Montréal, Montréal, H3C 3J7, Québec, Canada

    Bartha Maria Knoppers

  2. Bartha Maria Knoppers is chair of the Ethics Committee of the Human Genome Organization,

    Bartha Maria Knoppers

Authors
  1. Bartha Maria Knoppers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Knoppers, B. Status, sale and patenting of human genetic material: an international survey. Nat Genet 22, 23–26 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1038/8735

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/8735

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing