"U.S. top court says extracted human DNA cannot be patented"
http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKBRE95C0PW20130613?irpc=932
Seems like a sensible decision and would allow more rapid development of the market by preventing a throttling land grab. It is the techniques for investigation, the knowledge of the interactions of genes, and the new treatments that could be developed that are important (and of value) not the genetic sequences of naturally occurring DNA themselves.
"The ruling means that some of Myriad's [the company involved in the lawsuit] patents concerning synthetic molecules called cDNA, will likely survive, although the parties disagree on that point."
http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKBRE95C0PW20130613?irpc=932
Seems like a sensible decision and would allow more rapid development of the market by preventing a throttling land grab. It is the techniques for investigation, the knowledge of the interactions of genes, and the new treatments that could be developed that are important (and of value) not the genetic sequences of naturally occurring DNA themselves.
"The ruling means that some of Myriad's [the company involved in the lawsuit] patents concerning synthetic molecules called cDNA, will likely survive, although the parties disagree on that point."
No comments:
Post a Comment