Patentability Of Human Stem Cells Research Articles

Legal implications and patentability of human stem cells: Australia and Japan compared

This article reviews how the criteria for patentability apply to inventions involving human embryonic stem cells in both Australia and Japan, provides an analysis of the current position of the law, and discusses the possible implications in relation to the patenting of human stem cells. It also examines a recent court case, Cancer Voices Australia and another v Myriad Genetics Inc and another, the first judicial decision in Australia to consider the patentability of isolated DNA or Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) sequences that challenged the statutory provisions within the Patents Act 1990 (Cth). This article concludes that Japan is comparatively moderate in granting stem cell patents and has a far less ambiguous approach to stem cell patents than Australia.

Patent Law at the Centre of Today’s IP Debate

Patent law seems to be at the very centre of the IP debate today. From time to time news about developments in patent law can even be found in the headlines. Not so long ago we witnessed a fiery debate over the landmark Court of Justice decision relating to the patentability of human stem cells. This debate is far from over as new questions were referred to the Court of Justice for preliminary ruling. Today we are carefully watching what will happen with the unitary patent protection in the EU. We are also awaiting the Court of Justice’s decision in Huawei v. ZTE on FRAND defense in cases relating to standard essential patents. In the meantime, however, while awaiting further developments in the pending cases as well as the ratification process, the author of this editorial intends to turn the reader’s attention to a report entitled Patent Assertion and US Innovation. The report was released in June 2013 by the US President’s Council of Economic Advisers, the National Economic Council, and the Office of Science & Technology Policy. It is interesting for a number of reasons. First, the United States usually experiences many developments before these are experienced by other countries. Learning from that experience might be helpful to prepare for the developments that are also inevitable in the EU. Patent law is not an exception. Secondly, the report

Development and Implications of Patent Law

AbstractIntroductionThis is the second report pursuant to Article 16c of the Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions and bears the title “Developments and implications of patent law in the field of biotechnology and genetic engineering” (hereinafter the “second 16c Report”).Its purpose is to set out the key events which have occurred since publication of the first 16c Report, and to comment on two issues identified in the latter: the scope of patents on sequences or partial sequences of genes which have been isolated from the human body; and the patentability of human stem cells and cell lines obtained from them. The Commission’s analysis is based on the Commission staff working paper SEC(2005)943.

Patenting of Stem Cells and Processes Involving Stem Cells According to the Rules of the European Patent Convention

155 STEM CELLS ARE UNDIFFERENTIATED CELLS that can divide over a long period of time regardless of their origin and therefore can self-renew, without thereby differentiating, but can also differentiate into specialized cells after appropriate stimulation. On the basis of these properties, it is hoped that sooner or later, it will be possible to use human stem cells for treatment of diseases caused by defective or inadequate functioning of certain cells. The best-known examples of such diseases are Parkinson’s, juvenile diabetes, and myocardial diseases. In 2001, The Handelsblatt had estimated the economic potential of human stem cells at US$360 billion. Because more potential fields of use continue to be added; for example, screening and testing of active substances, the actual economic potential is probably now far higher. However, human stem cells have made headlines, not only because of the possible therapeutic uses they may open up, but also because of the legal and ethical problems associated with obtaining and using them. The judiciary and legislators have made efforts to keep step with development but see themselves confronted with enormous difficulties. While on the one hand, knowledge of human stem cells is growing rapidly, on the other hand, there is a lack of clarity about the fundamental differences between the various types of stem cells and their particular potential. Legal regulations, such as the Embryo Protection Act in Germany, also have frustrated the final clarification of the potential of these cells. From the wide problem area of stem cells, only a small section, namely, the patenting of human stem cells at the European Patent Office (EPO), is dealt with in this paper. The common definitions of the various types of stem cells will be presented before the legal basis for patenting and current practice of the EPO are considered.