Abstract
Using the goals of patent law as a starting point, controversies over patent applications are put in a wider ethical and societal context. I argue that ethical aspects are relevant in three phases: (1) before the patent application is granted, when the conditions of patentability are applied to concrete cases; (2) in the patent law, especially in interpretation and application of the so-called ”morality clause” in the European Patent Convention; (3) but also after patents have been granted. Differences between different patent systems are mentioned briefly, and the choice between more liberal and more restrictive policies is obviously not ethically neutral.
After a brief discussion of the relations between patents, economy and politics, some current criticisms of patent and patent law are discussed. Internal criticism, more or less accepting the premises of the system and trying to improve it, is distinguished from more radical, external criticism, which challenges one or several of the premises of the current patent system. This paves the way for a discussion of future relations between ethics and patent law. Some problems of definition and interpretation, again highlighting the role of values in the controversies over patents, are indicated, and the chapter concludes with a discussion of the present and future relations between EGE (European Group on Ethics) and EPO (European Patent Office).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIP) is administered by the World Trade Organization (WTO)
- 2.
I am grateful to Nils-Eric Sahlin for helpful comments on an earlier version of this chapter
References
European Parliament and Council Directive 98/44/EC on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions. Official Journal of the European Communities, 1998, L 213.
Bioethics and Patent Law. The case of Myriad genetics. WIPO Magazine, August 2006. Can be downloaded via www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2006/04/article_0003.html
Schneider I. Governing the patent system in Europe: the EPO’s supranational autonomy and its need for a regulatory perspective. Sci Public Policy 2009; 36:619–29.
Cyranoski D. Arsenic patent keeps drugs for rare cancer out of reach of many. Nat Med 2007; 13:1005. Epub 2007 Aug 31.
Warrell RP. Reply to “Arsenic patent keeps drugs for rare cancer out of reach of many.” Nat Med 2007; 13:1278.
Van Overwalle G. Gene patents and collaborative licensing mechanisms. Patent pools, clearing houses, open source models and liability regimes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Pogge T. Freedom from poverty as a human right: who owes what to the very poor? Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Pogge T. World poverty and human rights: cosmopolitan responsibilities and reforms. 2nd expanded edition. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2008.
Bentham J. An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. Oxford: Clarendon, 1996.
Singer P. Practical ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Gewirth A. Reason and morality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.
Gewirth A. The community of rights. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.
Beyleveld D, Brownsword R. Human Dignity in Bioethics and Biolaw. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Brownsword R. Human dignity, ethical pluralism, and the regulation of modern biotechnologies. In: T. Murphy ed., New technologies and human rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, pp. 19–84.
Council of Europe. Convention for the protection of human rights and dignity of the human being with regard to the application of biology and medicine: convention on human rights and biomedicine. European Treaty Series – No. 164. Council of Europe, Oviedo, 4 IV, 1997.
Crisp R, Slote M (eds.). Virtue ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Chappell T (ed.). Values and virtues. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Urbach A, Bar-Nur O, Daley GQ, Benvenisty N. Differential modeling of Fragile X syndrome by human embryonic stem cells and induced pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 2010; 6:407–11.
US Patent, Patent Number 4,736,866. Filed Jun 22, 1984, date of Patent April 12, 1988. Inventors: Leder et al.
European Patent Office. Board of appeal decision T 315/03 of July 6, 2004.
Ching LL. Canada’s supreme court rules out patents on higher life forms. ISIS, 30 Jan 03; downloadable from www.mindfully.org/GE/2003/Canada-Patents-Life30jan03.htm.
European Group on Ethics EGE, Opinion on the ethical aspects of patenting inventions involving human stem cells. Opinion N° 16. Brussels, Belgium: 7 May 2002.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hermerén, G. (2011). Patenting of Human Stem Cell-Based Inventions: Ethical Issues Including and Beyond the Morality Clause. In: Hug, K., Hermerén, G. (eds) Translational Stem Cell Research. Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60761-959-8_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60761-959-8_24
Publisher Name: Humana Press, Totowa, NJ
Print ISBN: 978-1-60761-958-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-60761-959-8
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)