[Upd-discuss] patenting genes

[Robert Weissman]

As many may know, the issue of the patenting of the human genome is now
very hot (see cover of today's Wall Street Journal).

I remain unclear on how it is that patents are granted for genes. Why is
not the discovery of a gene a non-patentable discovery rather than a
patentable invention?

The patent office is now making a distinction between finding genes and
being able to explain what a particular gene does, with a tendency to give
patents only the latter case. But why does this cross the invention
threshold?

This is not to ask for a moral critique of life or human patents, or even
necessarily a legal critique of the patents. I'm just trying to understand
the basic rationale for granting patents in these cases.

Robert Weissman
Essential Information			|   Internet:	rob@essential.org