[P2P-F] Fwd: [IP] SCOTUS: Genes can NOT be patented

Thu Jun 13 20:07:04 CEST 2013

thanks James!!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: james burke <lifesized at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:29 PM
Subject: Fwd: [IP] SCOTUS: Genes can NOT be patented
To: Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net>

GENES CANNOT BE PATENTED.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Yuri van Geest <yurivangeest at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 6:16 PM
Subject: Fwd: [IP] SCOTUS: Genes can NOT be patented
To: MoMoAms <org at mobilemonday.nl>, "team at quantifiedself.nl" <
team at quantifiedself.nl>

---------- Doorgestuurde bericht ----------
Van: *David Farber*
Datum: donderdag 13 juni 2013
Onderwerp: [IP] SCOTUS: Genes can NOT be patented
Aan: ip <ip at listbox.com>

Begin forwarded message:

From: Richard Forno <rforno at infowarrior.org>
Subject: SCOTUS: Genes can NOT be patented
Date: June 13, 2013 10:42:55 AM EDT
To: Infowarrior List <infowarrior at attrition.org>
Cc: Dave Farber <dave at farber.net>

Justices rule human genes cannot be patented

Richard Wolf, USA TODAY 10:37 a.m. EDT June 13, 2013

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/06/13/supreme-court-gene-breast-ovarian-cancer-patent/2382053/

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that human genes cannot be
patented, a decision with both immediate benefits for some breast and
ovarian cancer patients and long-lasting repercussions for biotechnology
research.

The decision represents a victory for cancer patients, researchers and
geneticists who claimed that a single company's patent raised costs,
restricted research and sometimes forced women to have breasts or ovaries
removed without sufficient facts or second opinions.

But the court held out a lifeline to Myriad Genetics, the company with an
exclusive patent on the isolated form of genes that can foretell an
increased genetic risk of cancer. The justices said it can patent a type of
DNA that goes beyond extracting the genes from the body.

The complex scientific case was perhaps the most important on the high
court's calendar other than its more celebrated cases involving same-sex
marriage, voting rights and affirmative action.

And unlike those cases, which are expected to divide the court sharply
along ideological lines, the controversial concept of gene patenting gave
all nine justices something to agree on.

The decision was based on past patent cases before the high court in which
the justices ruled that forces of nature, as opposed to products of
invention, are not patent-eligible.

Since 1984, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has granted more than
40,000 patents tied to genetic material. Armed with those patents, Myriad
has tested more than 1 million women since the late 1990s for mutations
that often lead to breast and ovarian cancer.

Most women who want testing must pay its price — $3,340 for the breast
cancer analysis and $700 for an additional test that picks up a genetic
link in about 10% of women who test negative the first time. Myriad
officials say about 95% of its patients receive insurance coverage, often
without co-payments, so that most patients pay only about $100.

Myriad and a broad array of industry trade groups argued that without
patent protection, research and development would dry up. Doctors,
geneticists, women's health groups and cancer patients contended that
competition would lower prices, improve outcomes and lead to more
discoveries.

The two sides had battled to a draw in lower courts: A federal district
court in New York sided with the  patent's challengers, while a divided
court of appeals that handles patent cases ruled for the company.

During oral argument in April, the court was presented with opposite
interpretations of Myriad's contribution to genetic research. Christopher
Hansen, the lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union representing the
patent's challengers, said Myriad had invented "nothing." Myriad's
attorney, Gregory Castanias, said the company created "a new molecule that
had never been known to the world."

The justices generally agreed that Myriad deserved credit for its process
of isolating the gene and its use – but not for the gene itself. "In
isolation, it has no value," Justice Sonia Sotomayor said. "It's just
nature sitting there."

But the compromise that emerged Thursday was evident during that 65-minute
debate. Several of the more conservative justices said a complete denial of
patent rights could jeopardize investments by other biotechnology companies
— and that could limit progress on a range of research, from agriculture to
the environment.

---
Just because i'm near the punchbowl doesn't mean I'm also drinking from it.

-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/6508916-345ab7e1
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=6508916&id_secret=6508916-49e8c799
Unsubscribe Now:
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=6508916&id_secret=6508916-13220834&post_id=20130613110029:FB63DB6E-D439-11E2-B790-81E7CBE5D3AD
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

-- 
Web: www.lifesized.net  Phone:+31 (0)6 5244 6445 Twitter: @lifesized

-- 
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

<http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates:
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20130614/4d42c609/attachment-0001.htm 