Science topic

Intellectual Property Law - Science topic

Explore the latest questions and answers in Intellectual Property Law, and find Intellectual Property Law experts.
Questions related to Intellectual Property Law
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
5 answers
Do you think that the free access to information resources in countries that do not have deterrent laws may pose a risk to the intellectual property rights of the researchers themselves?
Why? And why not?
Do you think that the free access to information resources in countries that do not have deterrent laws may pose a risk to the intellectual property rights of the researchers themselves?Why? And why notDo you think that free access to information sources poses a threat to the intellectual property rights of researchers themselves?
Relevant answer
Answer
Patents are all about making information available - the whole idea behind them is to give an inventor exclusive rights in exchange for disclosing how the invention works. So "access" to the information is not a problem, rather, it's the whole point.
Few inventors or small businesses can afford to patent an invention all around the world, and entrepreneurs in the smaller countries are often free to make and sell products that are patented in, say, the US, Europe, Japan, and China. That's good for the local economy, and it's not exactly a "threat" to the inventor -- although it can reduce the potential to earn profits in those countries. Inventors have to make a business decision on where they intend to market the product, and how much they should invest in patent protection in those countries.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
7 answers
Hello, I am wondering whether there is any legal regulation about the duration of the non-compete agreement between influencers and advertisers or not. It is well-known that It is not uncommon for an influencer to work with other companies. Some companies may offer the same or similar products or services. It is crucial for the parties to discuss the exclusivity. If the company requires the influencer to be exclusive, they may require a non-compete agreement. Definitely, this noncompetition should continue during the main agreement. Nonetheless, is there any legal regulation which can indicate that the duration of the noncompetition might be extended after the expiration of the main agreement?
Thanks in advance.
Relevant answer
Answer
The regulations on non competes can vary by jurisdiction. Check your jusrisdiction/state laws. Considering this is a newer field, i think getting professional advice is necessary.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
3 answers
For instance, the 'Historical Archives' section of the 'Audio Visual Library of the International Law' website gives access to the negotiation documents related to various instruments of international law. It is impressive because the information has been systematically arranged as introductory note, procedural history, status, documents, photos etc.
Is there such a source of systematic information related to IPRrelated documents?
Relevant answer
أن من اكثر الامور التي تثير خلافا في قانون المعاهدات الدولية هو مسالة تفسيرها, ولا سيما مسالة الرجوع الى الاعمال التحضيرية في عملية التفسير بين مؤيد لها باعتبارها تعطي اضاءات واشارات واضحة للمفسر في تحديد نية الاطراف, وبين معارض لها لان الدول التي تنضم الى المعاهدة الدولية تنضم الى نص رسمي مستقل عن الظروف التي ادت الى عقده.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
8 answers
The plagiarism which we are checking with the help of Turnitin software counts the similarity of usual English words even helping verbs and proverbs. If the similarity of specific terminology is counted instead of the entire usual English Sentences?
Relevant answer
Answer
These rules of plagiarism are more than enough. Otherwise, we couldn't write anything new.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
8 answers
If one of the coauthors of a research paper does not contribute intellectually but financially only to a project, is he/she entitled to call off the submission of the paper?
Relevant answer
Answer
Andrew Paul McKenzie Pegman Thanks for the reply. I think you are right.
Ibham Veza
I have not said anything about not including that person. I was asking about the decision of submitting the paper.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
14 answers
How much time it takes to grant a patent in your country? Many countries take up to 10 years to grant a patent. This is half of the time (20 years) of exclusive right. It is really horrible. Also state your opinion.
Relevant answer
Answer
As Mr. Rourk indicated, you can pay a fee to expedite your application usually resulting in a patent within a year. After filing a normal non-provisional application, the granting of a patent can depend on the subject matter and how busy a particular art unit is at the patent office. That being said, without paying the fee to expedite, an inventor can expect to wait from one to three years for the patent to issue.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
2 answers
Flutemetamol and Pittsburgh Compound B are used as Amyloid Binders used for Alzheimer's disease diagnosis.
Relevant answer
Answer
Just still a few additions: EP2182988 is still an older granted patent and WO2007064773 (University of Pittsburgh), which is withdrawn in the European phase. So, considering all these data and knowing that the University of Pittsburgh applications are not valid in Europe; an infringer or counterfeiter can only be accused by a patent proprietor with a valid patent in those countries where the patent is still valid. In the particular case of Markush claims (=many substituents on a basic structure), invalidation of a patent can be supported by showing that replacing one substituent by another has no 'inventive step' and can be considered as obvious for a skilled person. By the way, this short analysis is only for Europe.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
8 answers
Given the current US-China trade war, what are the feasible off-ramps to end it?
Relevant answer
Answer
I strongly believe the US-China trade war occurs as a result of political change in the US. Discontent regarding bilateral trade with China, which has long been accumulated through the years, has triggered power shift in the US. In addition, the Chinese would never budge as they are ready for all out war. Consequently, this war would keep going on unless another power shift occurs in the US.
I don't think international governance or third country would be able to meditate this conflict. Both countries insist that they are in position to dictate the world. It is not the other way around. The Dispute Settlement Body of the WTO was skipped from the beginning. Hence this conflict can only be solved by the US and China alone.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
6 answers
Have you ever heard of any ideology that prohibit political parties and considers them as an undemocratic tools?
Relevant answer
Answer
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
13 answers
At the national library of Luxembourg we are concerned that sharing/giving access to our digitised collections with DH scholars is difficult, if not impossible, as they are to a large extend subject to copyright and would require require rights clearance. 
How do address this issue? Are specific legal amendments required for Text and Data Mining for instance?
Regards, Patrick Peiffer
Relevant answer
Answer
I see - yes, publishers are right holders only for their catalogues.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
2 answers
The long dispute between Hynix (producer of DRAM) and Rambus, patent owner and licensor of related IP rights seems to be over. However a lot of questions remained unanswered. It is already practice that such disputes end with a settlement. However there is also a public enforcement dimension to these cases. In Europe the cases brought before the CJEU (General Court) are based on antitrust law. In the U.S. the litigation started with a similar action initiated by the FTC, but most of the confrontation was related to IP law and the allegations brought by Rambus against Hynix. Rambus is a very successful patent litigant and they won even in this case. However, a little but important battle was a success for Hynix. They succeeded to obtain the reduction of the total amount of royalties to be paid with $250,000,000 with reference to Rambus' spoliation of evidence (JEDEC documentation).
In Europe the actions for annulment against the Commission decisions giving authority to the commitments undertaken by Rambus in 2009 were withdrawn on 5 July 2013.
eiml.webs.com/ (for more links and case references)
Relevant answer
Answer
HI,
You may be interested by this paper:
A survey of litigation in corporate finance
Matteo Arena, Stephen Ferris
Managerial finance, 2017 vol 43, issue 1, (pp. 4 - 18)
Keywords: Corporate finance, Litigation
Best regards
 
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
2 answers
Are you familiar with Codex Alimentarius?. http://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/en/
Relevant answer
Answer
hello, no I work only on vegetable breeding.
Have a nice day
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
15 answers
I want to engineer a biological host to produce a desire product and create a new innovative process. For example, I have to use an enzyme that previously claimed in US 8877461 B2. How can I avoid infringing to what is claimed? Can I isolate a cDNA sequence encoding the polypeptide from the original host with a high similarity (>%98) to SEQ ID NO:1 US 8877461 B2?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi,
Note that a Patent Must have these three attributes:
1. Novel
2. Inventive
3. Industrially applicable
otherwise it will not be granted Patent Status. The concept, method, formulation, device, invention, or alike must be considered NOVEL and INVENTIVE to those who are: "Skilled in the art".
Therefore, it should not be possible to protect any naturally occurring molecule by a Patent, copyright or Trade Mark. 
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
4 answers
Can remember reading an article about this, but can't find why developing countries prefer WIPO over GATT in Intellectual Property law? 
Relevant answer
Answer
GATT is an agreement under the WTO that states controls which patent laws a country can adopt.  WIPO is not only a treaty but a patent filing, search and preliminary examination system.  Many small countries rely on the WIPO examination and, so, have to do less examination themselves.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
5 answers
Are Indian Universities come under small entity to take benefit of reduced patent filing fees? If yes which document can be provided with form no 28 as a proof?
Relevant answer
Answer
In order to qualify "Small Entity", the company should not have investment more than 10 crores rupees for goods and 5 crores rupees for services.
Accordingly, the University or College or Research Institute do not qualify for the small entity.
Recently, Indian government introduced Intellectual Property Scheme for Startups, but again universities would not be considered as a startup.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
8 answers
Can I explain the detail of my US patent in a manuscript and publish it? Is there any instruction explaining laws of US patents in a scientific article.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Mohammad,
It is difficult to answer your question precisely without additional information :
- the topic of your patent application (biotech, chemistry, ...);
- where you stand now in the US / intern. patent procedure;
- unicity of your patent application ...
If you have already applied, you can of course publish without breaking the novelty. It is not necessary to explain US patent regulation. Your publication could even reinforce your patent (and its inventors) in the sense that it will touch potential industries before the publication of your application. You have to clearly mention the title of your patent anf the inventors.
Your patent is about an invention and your publication will be about a discovery. It is not only the style that has to be different but also the core of your results. 
All the best for 2016 ! 
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
3 answers
Another important aspect raised by the scholars is that Article 66.2 is not limited to the IPR-related mechanism for promoting technology transfer. Andrew Michaels viewed that “Article 66.2 does not mention IPRs specifically, so developed countries are not limited to IPR-related mechanisms for promoting ITT.
See Andrew Michaels, “International Technology Transfer and TRIPS Article 66.2: Can Global Administrative Law Help Least-Developed Countries Get What They Bargained For”, 41 Geo. J. Int’l L. 223. Georgetown Journal of International Law, 2009.
Relevant answer
Answer
It appears to be the common view in Germany that technology transfer needs to be interpreted broadly (see Anzelotti in Busche et al, TRIPS - Commentary (2nd ed, 2013, Carl Heymanns Vertag), Art 66 para 18 - unfortunately in German), also referring to Michaels. Examples given are Tax incentives, direct allowances, R&D cooperations, specific training programs, etc.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
1 answer
Currently there are some reforms underway to reduce the effect of counterfeit goods in transit on trade within the EU, however, the problem still remains and there seem to be disparities in enforcement measures.
Relevant answer
Answer
Global economy imbalances cannot be corrected or neutralized by selective policy measures. That is why the problem of counterfeiting will exist. To reduce it only by restrictive measures, hmm, I dont believe in that. Well sometimes one can say about efficiency of situational prevention but due to globalization it is hard to improve
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
4 answers
Such as patents. Are there any others?
Relevant answer
Answer
PATENT: A grant of exclusive ownership, use, and alienation of an invention that is new (novel), or improved existing art for a period of 20 years. The USPTO summarizes patent as : "There are three types of patents:
     1) Utility patents may be granted to anyone who invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof;
     2) Design patents may be granted to anyone who invents a new, original, and ornamental design for an article of manufacture; and
     3) Plant patents may be granted to anyone who invents or discovers and asexually reproduces any distinct and new variety of plant."
Since the exclusivity is 20 years, many patent applications are contested on many ground to prevent the patent from being granted. During the contest period, the inventive process is disclosed in the application and competitors may access that information. when the secret becomes and open secret, as soon as something "new" is disclosed, there are people working on "improving" it already even before the patent is issue. This process also contribute to the improvement of the art and "forced sharing" of knowledge.
REFERENCES: Article 33 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
3 answers
Trademark documents present different "dates", filing date, registration date, priority date, first use in commerce, etc. Can someone explain at which type of "managerial" event each date might be related to? For instance, may filing date be related to product/marketing innovation?
Furthermore, I noticed that the date of first use in commerce sometimes come before the filing date. How is that possible?
Can you suggest any references (especially from USPTO) that can provide some clarification?
Relevant answer
Answer
I generally agree with Feng Tian. Priority date usually means that the trade mark registration applicant has applied on an earlier date (the priority date) to register the same mark for (substantially) the same goods or services in a different country before the application that you are looking at was filed and is asking the trademark registration office to treat the application you are looking at as if it had been filed on that earlier date. That is: I file for KODAK in the UK on 12 Jan 2012, and file in France for KODAK on 12 May 2012 claiming priority from my UK application. You make your first filing for KODAK, in France, on 12 March 2012 - sorry, you lose because my effective date in France is 12 Jan 2012 which is earlier than yours. First use in commerce is what it says - the day you first used the mark in trade in the country in question. (It matters in the US). First use in commerce can and often will predate the trademark application date because generally you don't have to register a mark before you can begin using it.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
5 answers
how is weak copyright laws impacting music industry in India?
Relevant answer
Answer
Without an empirical study, it is hard to say.  With the advent of the internet for performance and distribution, enforcement has become very difficulty for any music copyrights generally.  What is "weak"?  Lengthy duration for music is meaningless --few pieces have much of a lifespan.  Protection against literal copying and requirement of paying royalties for performance is what you basically get in every country.  The problem everywhere is enforcing those rights and administering a compulsory licensing scheme for performance.  Musicians in the United States mostly scratch out a living from live performances.  The revenue stream from selling music or recordings is mostly dried up.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
4 answers
This right has been enshrined in Canadian Copyright Act since 1988. It has also been judicially enforced in France. Unfortunately, it still remains not applied in many cases. The main trouble, for the artists, is to deal with the owner of the support of the work.
Relevant answer
Answer
Thanks for your answer !
Yes, it's true. Most of the owners want to display the physical copy of the works. Moreover, their price can be very expensive, so that they can't bear to let the exhibition right to the author. It's particularly the case with public institutions, such as museums, in the name of the right to culture.
But we can find some examples of its enforcement in France. the most notable case was judged by the Supreme Court in 2002. The exhibition right has been enforced for two photographers, whose works were displayed by a non-profit organization without their permission and, of course, without any royalties. Some lower courts later judged in the same way. But there are very few cases, and the case law is not very significant.
Most of the authors who are interested in this right stopped to sell their works, just to keep a control on it. They rent these to galleries and sometimes organize their own exhibitions. But they do it more as owner of the physical copy than author of the work.
What do you know about it ? is it the same in Netherlands ? Other countries ?
Best regards.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
7 answers
CGI and IEF provide combined scores, but I really need them separately for patents, copyrights, trade secrets, and trademarks. 50+ countries would be great.
Relevant answer
Answer
wow, clearly none of you actually work with patents. this is like a firm's accountants putting a value on a firm's ipr. you can do it with trademarks and literary/musical copyright, but when you head into patents the whole world changes. the value depends on the validity - and the perceived validity depends on the value [more profit, more incentive to revoke, more incentive to defend, and more incentive to do a deal unless the parties are totally head to head competitors]. most patent cases are settled before they arrive in court, the settlement being based on the likelihood of winning and the cost of failing to win. with kevlar and pampers/huggies we had worldwide fights - with most cases we don't. 
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
9 answers
What is the limitation of having an uniform recognition of registration of patents among major jurisdictions ? It has been major problem among the inventors and companies around the world where they have to register their patents in almost every major jurisdictions in order to enjoy such protection for their inventions. My question here is whether what is the limitation for other major jurisdiction to recognise the registration of patent in a counterpart country.
Relevant answer
Answer
 The initial process of patent application has been internationalized via WIPO and the Patent Cooperation Treaty. A single PCT application can get you started in 140+ jurisdictions.  There other treaties that aim towards so-called harmonizations of patent laws including TRIPS and  the recent  PLT. A few of the larger jurisdictions (the IP5) have multilateral agreements and experiments going on to see IF search results from one country might save work in other countries examining the counterpart patent application.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
4 answers
An analysis of the effect of TRIPS on developing and least developed countries.
Relevant answer
Answer
In my opinion, answer is it could, but doens not happen!
TRIPS provides a general framework. It is up to the signaotories to develop their own IPR legal framework. Many developig countries do not have a functional and enforcable IPR framework. That is why, although many developing countries are  signatoriies to TRIPS, the technology transfer is not happening much!
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
8 answers
I am no expert in the legal issues here, but Monsanto, Dow, Sygenta, etc. have been copyrighting genes to food crops as I understand it. However, these crops that they are utilizing, corn for example, represent an intellectual property. These are not wild, unaltered species, but species that have been transformed through thousands of years of plant breeding by indigenous peoples. It seems to me that these genes then, again say of commercial corn, should actually belong to the indigenous peoples if anyone, and more likely should belong to a creative commons. After all, we are currently only adding our own little breeding piece to a process that has taken thousands of years to undertake. Thought?
Relevant answer
Answer
Don't mention it, Noa, hope it helps.
Let me know if I can be of any further assistance; I represented Argentina during the final stage of this case. It was a leading case, where it was defined the scope of the Patent along the agrifood chain. Helpful not only for Argentine farmers, but also for farmers around the world, because it's a very important precedent.
Regards, Alejandro
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
5 answers
Are there any existing tools of enforcement?
Relevant answer
Answer
This paper is useful, even if it isn't not so recent...
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
10 answers
Sometimes it is said that you should not publish your work before applying for a patent. Is this true? Are there any Do's and Don'ts about patents?
Relevant answer
Answer
Three basic Criteria:
1) New: Should be completely different from prior art (should be published or disclosed ever anywhere!);
2) Non-obvious: Should be newer for the person Skilled in art as well as should be reproducible by person skilled in art;
3) Industrial Applicable: Should be useful to society/industry...
From these criteria you can definitely say that your work shouldn't published anywhere before you FILE a patent...
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
7 answers
I intend to carry out an empirical study assessing the strength of IPRs in Africa. Does anybody have any idea about recent empirical literature?
Relevant answer
Answer
There seem not to be much empirical research in Africa in relation to IPR. Below is link to a dissertation that reports results of research about Kenyan university libraries in relation to copyright.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
5 answers
Although created more than four decades ago, the so-called “three-step test" has grown in importance over the last years since it began to be used in response to the abuse of the copyright exceptions in the digital context. After being initially confined to exceptions to the reproduction right, its scope was later extended to other rights and limitations.
However, unlike other mechanisms for assessment and adequacy of rights in apparent conflict, the formula of the “three-step test” came without a prior legal reference which helps determine its shape clearly. Given this lack of substance and genealogy, the rule has come to be construed and used in a well diverse, even contradictory, way by the authorities who have made decisions regarding the legitimacy of certain exceptions in the digital context.
Relevant answer
Answer
Could you send your article attached with teksnu@gmail.com please ?
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
17 answers
In recent discussions I have been repeatedly told that some research environments are 'unsafe' places to create innovative work. Has anyone got any experience of this?
Relevant answer
Answer
There are two issues that are being badly mixed in this discussion regarding the output of scientific research: 1- the documents written by the researchers, and 2- the "ideas" that have been produced by that research and that might be patentable. I used quotes because ideas as such are not patentable, but only devices, new products, or techniques to achieve physical effects. The two issues lead to quite different discussions, pertaining respectively to copyright and to patents.
Research scientists may want to patent what they have created, while not desiring to claim any payment or protection for their ownership of copyrights on their writings, usually provided no one else will claim any rights (as publishers do). What is the fruit of the labour of research scientists?
Whether people want to claim copyright of rather favor open access is usually dependent on why they write. A journalist usually needs to be paid for his writing, A scientist is paid for his results and his fame, and will rather try to increase visibility of his work by removing obstacles to accessing his writings.
Historically, copyright was always claimed and enforced, because printed publishing was a costly investment that had to be amortized on sales. Digital publishing is much cheaper and now leaves the choice of enforcing copyright or not. Then each author has to address the issue of what he considers preferable. An sometimes the author's employer may have a say in the issue. In the case of publicly funded research, the employer is the taxpayer. He may consider that research is more productive, to everyone's benefit, when publications are freely accessible.
Regarding patents, issues may be similar. Historically, a patent is not a right but a privilege granted by the state (or king) to a private person. It may be as a reward (to encourage innovation) or simply be in the state interest. For example, a patent is a monopoly, and that may encourage people to invest to industrialize (into production) the patented subject, so that the results may benefit the economy. Without the monopoly, people might hesitate to take the risk. But should patent be protected by society when there is no production investment that will benefit society? What if there is no need for production investment?
This said, I have no ideology regarding the choices to be made. I only believe in the one thing that rules the world, including species evolution: thermodynamics, what is wasteful and what is energetically or economically effective. In the long run, thermodynamics always win. That is why I see publishing as a dead industry, let's say a zombie industry. Of course, solution have to be found to pay creators (scientists, artists, writers of all kinds, ...) for their work. But it is not at all clear that the old solutions based on copyright ownership are the most effective ones in the digital world. This has nothing to do with altruism.
Protection of private property may be a right. But what is private property, what can be private property, what should be private property, whether material or intellectual, is very variable in time and space. I recall that not very long ago, human beings could be, and some are still considered as such in some parts of the world. I know, for example, that there was "some difficulty convincing several [m]illion people" in southern USA "that we should perhaps change our ways and live in one big propertyless human family ". It was also hard to convince the French sea traders who made good business of it. Copyright was not a matter of property before the printing press, and may well cease to be one with the advent of the Internet.
Similarly, patents are a fairly recent invention, dating from the 16th century (from memory). Are patents a good idea? This, as I said previously, depends on a lot of parameters that are very variable. Should patents apply to objets produced privately with a 3D printer? That is an interesting issue for debate.
I certainly agree that, at least in our society as is, people should be paid for their work. However, once the invention is made, once the tooth is pulled, once the car is built, once the book is written, there is no longer work to be done. Should people still be paid for it? So saying that people should be paid for their work leaves much room for interpretation. We should be very careful when we compare the economies of industrial manufacturing, of services, or of intellectual creation. They are very different.
But to believe that we will stop creating simply because we do not get ownership of the creation is just ridiculous. Most researchers would do another job if they were in it only for the money. Most authors do not live from their writings. Only people who do not create can believe that creators are motivated by money and property, though they may be interested in that too. Creation is an urge, creation is fun, creation gives us a name and make us survive, and it is useful to boot. Research and creation are part of that quest for knowledge and understanding which haunts all of us.
As for trademarks, they are supposedly much older. The invention is attributed by some people to the prostitutes of ancient Athens and Alexandria. I suspect it must be even older. But that is another story.
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
14 answers
It is my observation that Indian researchers generally go for publishing research paper instead of filing Patent application. Is it the lack of awareness or cost involved the real reason?
Relevant answer
Answer
Reason one: In India the patent right is not a big enough carrot to lure the researcher into filing a patent application. Maybe the research subject has no commercial value. Maybe the cost to commercialize the technology is too big a hurdle for the researcher to climb over. Maybe the Patents Act in India provides too little protection for patents.
Reason two: The university or research institution where the researcher works do not have licensing department or policy to recoup the value of IP rights. A researcher needs professional help when deciding whether to file a patent application for his/her new discoveries. Writing a patent is different from writing a paper. Even if the researcher is awarded a patent, he/she may have trouble selling the patent right.
Reason three: Publish or perish. If no extra bonus is provided by a patent application when compared with a paper, most researchers would choose publishing a paper: much quicker to publish and much easier to write (no claims at all).
  • asked a question related to Intellectual Property Law
Question
13 answers
In 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court held that 1) a naturally occurring gene or a DNA segment is a product of nature, and thus not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated, but 2) synthetic complementary DNA ("cDNA") is patent eligible because it is not naturally occurring in AMP vs. Myriad Genetics.
Now there is a new wrinkle to the problem. Scientists may have discovered a second code hiding within DNA. This second code contains information that changes how scientists read the instructions contained in DNA and interpret mutations to make sense of health and disease. (Quoted from: http://www.sciencenewsline.com/articles/2013121222250032.html)
Is this discovery patentable?
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Dr. Feng Tian,
Invention is differing from discovery. An invention has 3 characteristics:
1. Novelty
2. Inventive Step
3. Industrially applicable
Genes and their derivatives are products of nature and manipulation of them is not an invention. An Invention can be patented (and not a discovery). For example, electricity is a discovery; can you patent it? Therefore a second code hiding within DNA and even synthetic complementary DNA (cDNA) cannot be patented.