CODING FOR LIFE - SHOULD ANY ENTITY HAVE THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE AND SELL ISOLATED DNA?
|
| Title | CODING FOR LIFE - SHOULD ANY ENTITY HAVE THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO USE AND SELL ISOLATED DNA? |
| Authors | |
| Abstract | Myriad Genetics, Inc. ("Myriad") obtained patents in the 1990s on two "isolated" human breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility genes ("BRCA"). Myriad did not list all the isolated sequences it claims to have a right to monopolize, but instead claims a patent on the physical phenomena itself -- all DNA segments that code for the BRCA1 polypeptide, even the sequences Myriad has not identified and even those someone else in the future creates or isolates the sequences of through a method or methods not contemplated by Myriad. An impressive array of non-profit medical societies, doctors and patients sued to have the Myriad patents declared invalid. In 2010, the District Court for the Southern District of New York held in Association for Molecular Pathology v. United States Patent and Trademark Office that the claimed product patents for isolated DNA segments constituted unpatentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §101. On July 29, 2011, a divided panel of the Federal Circuit reversed the District Court and held that the isolated DNA segments constituted patentable subject matter. Of the three member panel, Judge Lourie concluded that the isolated DNA was markedly different than the native DNA, so constituted patentable subject matter. Although Judge Moore agreed that certain DNA segments constituted patentable subject matter, she believed that the longer isolated DNA segments probably did not constitute patentable subject matter. However, primarily in light of the fact that the US Patent and Trademark Office has been granting patents for isolated DNA for years, Judge Moore concurred in the judgment of Judge Lourie. Judge Bryson concurred on one of the product claims (for synthetic cDNA) but dissented on claims pertaining to the isolated DNA segments on the grounds that isolated DNA did not differ markedly from the native DNA and that the function of the isolated DNA was identical to the function of the native DNA.The Supreme Court stated that "Congress may not authorize the issuance of patents whose effects are to remove existent knowledge from the public domain, or to restrict free access to materials already available." This article argues that the Federal Circuit - not Congress - has done just that and has given Myriad a wall to restrict free access to materials that have literally been in humans for centuries. The isolated DNA segments of claim 1 do exactly the same coding as do the native segments--nothing more; nothing less. The segments of claim 1 do not act as primers or probes, so they do not have markedly different characteristics or utility than native DNA, which the Supreme Court has ruled courts must consider. Moreover, the functioning of the sequence of the nucleotide bases is a physical phenomenon that Myriad has not created but has captured in its claim. Judges Lourie and Moore disregarded Supreme Court precedent and the fundamental principle that physical phenomena are not patentable subject matter. |
| Publisher | University Library System, University of Pittsburgh |
| Date | 2012-04-13 |
| Source | Pittsburgh Journal of Technology Law and Policy Vol 12: VOLUME XII- FALL 2011/SPRING 2012 |
| Rights | 1. Author´s Grant of Rights in Work to Journal. a. The Author hereby grants to the Journal the right of first publication of the Work. b. The Author hereby grants to the Journal and its agents the royalty-free, nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons 3.0 License (Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works), or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions: i. Attribution-other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the Author as indicated on the Journal´s Website; ii. Noncommercial-other users (including the Journal) may not use this Work for commercial purposes; iii. No Derivative Works-other users (including the Journal) may not alter, transform, or build upon this Work; with the understanding that any of the above conditions can be waived by or with the permission of the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain or subject to re-use as a matter of fair use or fair dealing or otherwise under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by this grant of rights. c. The Author authorizes the Journal to edit the Work prior to publication, but the Work shall not be published by the Journal unless it is acceptable in its final form to both the Author and the Journal. 2. Author´s Retention of Rights in the Work. a. The Author retains the copyright in the Work. b. The Author is permitted to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the Journal´s published version of the Work (e.g., post the Work to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), so long the subsequent publication contains an acknowledgement and credit of the first publication in this Journal. c. The Author is permitted and encouraged to post online a manuscript of the Work in institutional repositories or on a Website prior to publication of the Work, including but not limited to repositories maintained and/or hosted by SSRN and Bepress. The Author agrees on a best efforts basis to include with any such posting, upon publication of the Work, (i) a reference to the DOI (Digital Object Identifier, explained at http://www.doi.org/) assigned to the Work; (ii) a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal; and (iii) the citation to the published version of the Work. 3. Author´s Representations and Warranties a. The Author represents and warrants that to the best of the Author´s knowledge: i. the Work is the Author´s original work, and the Author has the power to convey the rights granted in this Agreement; ii. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party; iii. the Work has not previously been published, in whole or in part, except as mutually agreed to in writing by both the Author and the Journal. iv. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and v. the Work contains no matter that is defamatory, violates an person´s right of privacy, right of publicity, civil right, interest in confidential or proprietary information, or that is otherwise unlawful. b. Upon the Journal´s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Journal, at the Author´s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by the Journal to be covered by the principles of fair use. c. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold the Journal harmless from the Author´s breach of any of the representations and warranties contained in this Paragraph 3, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to or deriving from the Journal´s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content 4. Final Agreement This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Author and the Journal with respect to the publication and copyright of the Work. Any modifications of or additions to the terms of this Agreement shall be mutually agreed to in writing by both Author and Journal. |