Abstract
In June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered a controversial ruling that naturally occurring DNA segments are "products of nature" and therefore not patentable subject matter. At this intersection between science and law, in litigation of crucial importance to patients, science, and multibillion-dollar biotech enterprises, the appellate judges sidestepped genetics and engaged in a war of metaphors from diamonds to chocolate chip cookies. This case is not an outlier. Apprehensive judges and juries in both Canada and the United States find many convenient excuses to avoid coming to grips with the underlying science in patent cases. But this is simply not acceptable. Legal rulings must be, and must seem to be, well grounded, as a matter of both law and science. The legitimacy of court decisions in the eyes of the stakeholders and the broader public depends on it.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
