Gene Patenting: Do The Ends Justify The Means?

Authors

• Mark A. Chavez

Abstract

Over the course of the last decade, medical interest and research in the human genome has grown at an exponential rate. As a result, profit-seekers and scientists are turning to patent law to protect their financial and medical interests; recent recipients of patent protection include bacteria, a type of mouse, and even human genes. As these trends in medicine and intellectual property law develop, considerable debates are surging regarding the morality of awarding property rights in biological material, particularly human genes. While both sides of this debate present compelling arguments, if scientists and investors are expected to advance their innovative research, they must have some guarantee to protect their financial investment and scientific findings. Patents provide this guarantee.

Part One of this article describes the science behind gene patenting, examines the structure of the American patent system, and explains how human genes satisfy the legal requirements of patent law. Part Two presents the arguments of those who defend the practice of gene patenting, while Part Three answers the criticisms of those who morally oppose gene patenting on moral grounds. Finally, Part Four suggests changes to the American patent law system that would balance the interests of science and morality more effectively than the current system. Such changes include adding an experimentation exception to the current gene patenting regime, limiting the scope of genetic patents, and liberalizing the compulsory licensing system currently governing patents.

Recommended Citation

Mark A. Chavez, Gene Patenting: Do The Ends Justify The Means?, 7 Computer L. Rev. & Tech. J. 255 (2003)