Law Commons^™

The Biotechnology Process Patent Act Of 1995: Providing Unresolved And Unrecognized Dilemmas In U.S. Patent Law, Becca Alley

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Use Of Facial Recognition Technology For Medical Purposes: Balancing Privacy With Innovation, Seema Mohapatra

Pepperdine Law Review

Imagine applying for a job, and as part of your application process, your prospective employer asks for a photograph. You, as an eager candidate, comply with the request and, unbeknownst to you, the employer runs your picture through a software program that scans you for any common genetic diseases and that estimates your longevity. Alas, your face indicates that you may die young. No job for you. Although this sounds like science fiction, we may not be that far off from this scenario. In June 2014, scientists from Oxford reported that they have developed a facial recognition program that uses …

Useless Information: Genetic Patenting, The Usefulness Requirement, And The Effect On The “Big Freeze”, David T. Bennett

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This note considers the current state of affairs regarding patentability in the field of biotechnology, especially that of genes and DNA. Part II gives a brief background of patents in general, including the requirements that must be met for a patent to be granted, the way in which the patent process works, and the options available to a patent holder once a patent has been granted. Part III explores the history of biotechnology patents. Part IV takes a look at the relationship between patents and biotechnology, and sheds light on some of the common arguments both in favor of and …

Bioprospect Theory, James Ming Chen

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

Conventional wisdom treats biodiversity and biotechnology as rivalrous values. The global south is home to most of earth's vanishing species, while the global north holds the capital and technology needed to develop this natural wealth. The south argues that intellectual property laws enable pharmaceutical companies and seed breeders in the industrialized north to commit biopiracy. By contrast, the United States has characterized calls for profit-sharing as a threat to the global life sciences industry. Both sides magnify the dispute, on the apparent consensus that commercial exploitation of genetic resources holds the key to biodiversity conservation.

Both sides of this debate …

Protecting Products Versus Platforms, Jacob S. Sherkow

Articles & Chapters

Patents have long been the most important legal assets of biotech companies. Increasingly, however, biotech firms find themselves on one side of a divide: as either traditional product companies or platform companies. Given the differences between these two types of business models, the merits of intellectual property (IP) protection vary between them. This article explores how those differences relate to biotech startups and entrepreneurs seeking to protect their inventions.

Who Owns Gene Editing? Patents In The Time Of Crispr, Jacob S. Sherkow

Other Publications

New gene-editing technologies, like CRISPR, promise revolutionary advances in biology and medicine. However, several patent disputes in the USA and UK may have complicated who can use CRISPR. What does this mean for the future of gene editing?

Animal Dignity, Reed Elizabeth Loder

Animal Law Review

The aim of this Article is to find a broader theoretical basis for animal protection than the current ideas of personhood and capabilities provide. Human dignity is variously defined but pervasive in grounding human rights and should have a counterpart for animal protection beyond minimum welfare that can improve the quality of animal lives overall. Dignity has an inward dimension based on the value of an individual that should not be violated and an outward aspect in the individual’s bearing to the world, both of which apply to animals. In content, human individuals have dignity in autonomously directing their lives, …

The Mayo Framework Is Bad For Your Health, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

This Article begins by providing a brief historical retrospective of the development of the patent eligibility doctrine, and then delves into the related questions of: (1) what are the Supreme Court’s policy objectives for the recent reinvigoration of the patent eligibility doctrine; and (2) has it achieved those objectives? The article then discusses three important out-standing questions regarding the application of the new test for patent eligibility: (1) what constitutes a natural phenomenon; (2) what constitutes an inventive step; and (3) what, if any, role does preemption play in the analysis? The article then provides four examples of recent lower …

Pursuit Of Profit Poisons Collaboration, Jacob S. Sherkow

Other Publications

The CRISPR–Cas9 patent battle demonstrates how overzealous efforts to commercialize technology can damage science.

Are Engineered Genetic Sequences Copyrightable?: The U.S. Copyright Office Addresses A Matter Of First Impression, Christopher M. Holman, Claes Gustafsson, Andrew W. Torrance

Faculty Works

In spite of the compelling logic that would support extending copyright to engineered DNA sequences, copyright protection for genetic code has not been legally recognized in the US, or as far as we know anywhere. The Copyright Act is silent on the point, the courts do not appear to have ever addressed the question, and the Copyright Office has taken the position that an engineered genetic sequence is not copyrightable subject matter. In an attempt to advance the conversation, we submitted an engineered DNA sequence to the Copyright Office for registration, and then appealed the Office’s decision refusing to register …

The Changing Life Science Patent Landscape, Arti K. Rai, Jacob S. Sherkow

Articles & Chapters

Over the past two decades, patent law in the life sciences has been buffeted by numerous controversies. With courts, legislatures and patent offices all responding, one could be forgiven for believing that the main constant has been change. In the following article, we look back at some of the major events in life science intellectual property (IP) law and business practice over the past 20 years and then suggest where IP practice in the life sciences may be heading in the coming years.

Describing Drugs: A Response To Professors Allison And Ouellette, Jacob S. Sherkow

Articles & Chapters

Profs. Allison and Ouellette’s Article, How Courts Adjudicate Patent Definiteness and Disclosure, 65 Duke L.J.609 (2015), on courts’ adjudication of certain patent disputes presents some surprising data: pharmaceutical patents litigated to judgment fare substantially worse on written-description analyses if they are not part of traditional pioneer-generic litigation. This Response engages in several hypotheses for this disparity and examines the cases that make up Allison and Ouellette’s dataset. An analysis of these cases finds that the disparity can be best explained by technological and judicial idiosyncrasies in each case, rather than larger differences among pharmaceutical patent cases. This finding contextualizes …

Pursuit Of Profit Poisons Collaboration, Jacob S. Sherkow

Other Publications

The CRISPR–Cas9 patent battle demonstrates how overzealous efforts to commercialize technology can damage science.