Law | Open Access Articles | Digital Commons Network™

What I Have Learned From The Reactions To My Books, Michael Crichton Dec 2008

What I Have Learned From The Reactions To My Books, Michael Crichton

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

You Don't Own Me: Recommendations To Protect Human Contributors Of Biological Material After Washington University V. Catalona, Laura B. Rowe Dec 2008

You Don't Own Me: Recommendations To Protect Human Contributors Of Biological Material After Washington University V. Catalona, Laura B. Rowe

Chicago-Kent Law Review

As research using human biological materials has rapidly developed, so too has the debate over the ownership of these highly valuable materials. Most recently, the Eighth Circuit in Washington University v. Catalona held that research participants do not retain any ownership interest in the biological materials they contribute to research. This note argues that the misguided Catalona decision, in combination with unclear, outdated, and inadequate federal research regulations, has left human contributors of biological material largely unprotected and vulnerable to the goals of researchers, institutions, and biotechnology firms. Accordingly, this note proposes critical amendments to the federal research regulations that …

Go to article

Upstream Without A Paddle: Gene Patenting And The Protection Of The "Infostructure", Seth Shulman Dec 2008

Upstream Without A Paddle: Gene Patenting And The Protection Of The "Infostructure", Seth Shulman

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The U.S. patent system, designed to protect rights to specific, marketable gadgets, has increasingly over the past few decades granted patents on comparatively abstract and amorphous ideas that stretch the system beyond recognition. Overly broad patents, and patents too far "upstream" from the marketplace, I argue, undermine the patent regime, hamper innovation, and prove exceedingly difficult to adjudicate. Using a series of conceptual and historical analogies, I attempt to assess the patenting of genes and other broad, "upstream" patents from a public policy context, emphasizing, as many are coming to realize, that things work best in the knowledge-based economy when …

Go to article

Gene Patents And The Product Of Nature Doctrine, John M. Conley Dec 2008

Gene Patents And The Product Of Nature Doctrine, John M. Conley

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Gene patents have proven to be enormously controversial, evoking a strong response from many categories of skeptics. Objections have focused on the foreclosure of research, the potential denial of healthcare, or the proper application of the patent laws. Gene patents also tend to trigger an elemental response that lies at the core of almost every objection: You shouldn't be able to patent a gene! This article focuses on the latter point, restating it as a question of legal doctrine: Why is it that the law has routinely treated genes as patentable inventions rather than unpatentable natural phenomena? Part II reviews …

Go to article

Human Gene Patents: Proof Of Problems?, Timothy Caulfield Dec 2008

Human Gene Patents: Proof Of Problems?, Timothy Caulfield

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The patenting of human genes has been the focus of intense policy debate. The concerns associated with gene patenting are diverse, ranging from dignity based critiques to suggestions that patents will drive up the cost of health care. But the two concerns that have generated the most policy attention are that they hurt basic research (also known as the "anti-commons" problem) and access to useful technologies. The goal of this short comment is to question the degree to which existing evidence supports the speculation about these two justifications for patent reform. While the issues associated with gene patents are complex …

Go to article

The Gender Bend: Culture, Sex, And Sexuality- A Latcritical Human Rights Map Of Latina/O Border Crossings, Berta Esperanza Hernandez-Truyol Oct 2008