Skip to content or view mobile version

Home | Mobile | Editorial | Mission | Privacy | About | Contact | Help | Security | Support

A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues.

no human patents pls

.S. DENIES PATENT FOR A TOO-HUMAN HYBRID | 20.02.2005 01:46 | G8 2005 | Analysis | Bio-technology | Social Struggles | London

no not to human patenting

humane rights for all species

..a timely article in the steading fight against slavery

.S. DENIES PATENT FOR A TOO-HUMAN HYBRID

By Rick Weiss
Washington Post
Sunday, February 13, 2005; Page A03

A New York scientist's seven-year effort to win a patent on a
laboratory-conceived creature that is part human and part animal ended in
failure Friday, closing a historic and somewhat ghoulish chapter in American
intellectual-property law.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office rejected the claim, saying the hybrid
-- designed for use in medical research but not yet created -- would be too
closely related to a human to be patentable.

Paradoxically, the rejection was a victory of sorts for the inventor, Stuart
Newman of New York Medical College in Valhalla, N.Y. An opponent of patents
on living things, he had no intention of making the creatures. His goal was
to set a legal precedent that would keep others from profiting from any
similar "inventions."

But in an age when science is increasingly melding human and animal
components for research -- already the government has allowed many patents
on "humanized" animals, including a mouse with a human immune system -- the
decision leaves a crucial question unanswered: At what point is something
too human to patent?

Officials said it was not so difficult to make the call this time because
Newman's technique could easily have created something that was much more
person than not. But newer methods are allowing scientists to fine-tune
those percentages, putting the patent office in an awkward position of being
the federal arbiter of what is human.

"I don't think anyone knows in terms of crude percentages how to
differentiate between humans and nonhumans," said John Doll, a deputy
commissioner for patents. Yet neither is the office comfortable with a
"we'll know it when we see it" approach, he added: "It would be very helpful
. . . to have some guidance from Congress or the courts."

The Newman case reveals how far U.S. intellectual-property law has lagged
behind the art and science of biotechnology. The Supreme Court has addressed
the issue of patenting life only once, and that was 25 years ago.

It also raises profound questions about the differences -- and similarities
-- between humans and other animals, and the limits of treating animals as
property.

"The whole privatization of the biological world has to be looked at,"
Newman said, "so we don't suddenly all find ourselves in the position of
saying, 'How did we get here? Everything is owned.' "

Newman's application, filed in 1997, described a technique for combining
human embryo cells with cells from the embryo of a monkey, ape or other
animal to create a blend of the two -- what scientists call a chimera.
That's the Greek term for the mythological creature that had a lion's head,
a goat's body and a serpent's tail.

Others had used similar methods to create a "geep," part goat and part
sheep. But Newman's human-animal chimeras would have greater utility in
medicine, for drug and toxicity testing and perhaps as sources of organs for
transplantation into people.

In collaboration with Jeremy Rifkin, a Washington biotech activist and
president of the Foundation on Economic Trends, he challenged the patent
office: Issue the patent, which would keep others from pursuing such work
for 20 years, or reject it, effectively accomplishing the same thing.

The two had until Friday to appeal the latest rejection, but they decided to
let it pass and declare victory.

For Rifkin, the case was deja vu in reverse. When U.S. scientist Ananda
Chakrabarty applied for the first patent on a living organism -- a
genetically engineered bacterium able to digest oil spills -- the case ended
up in the Supreme Court because the patent office did not want to patent
life forms. That time Rifkin filed the main amicus brief supporting the
patent office.

They lost. In a 5 to 4 decision, the court declared that patents could be
issued on "anything under the sun that is made by man."

The office has obliged, issuing patents on bacteria, yeast and, as of last
fall, 436 animals.

In 1987, the patent office announced it would draw the line with humans, but
it offered no legal rationale or statutory backing.

The paper trail created by the Newman claim offers perhaps the best
explication yet for that ban. One rationale in the documents sent to Newman
is that such a patent would be "inconsistent with the constitutional right
to privacy." After all, the office wrote, a patent allows the owner to
exclude others from making the claimed invention. If a patent were to issue
on a human, it would conflict with one of the Constitution's core privacy
rights -- a person's right to decide whether and when to procreate.

Patents on humans could also conflict with the 13th Amendment's prohibition
against slavery. That is because a patent permits the owner to exclude
others from "using" the invention. Because "use" can mean "employ,"
officials wrote, a patent holder could prevent a person from being employed
by any other -- which "would be tantamount to involuntary servitude."

Finally, the office noted that it is illegal to import products that are
made abroad using processes patented in the United States. To show how that
could cause a problem in a world where people are patentable, it gave an
example in which a person goes overseas and undergoes one of the many
surgical procedures patented by U.S. doctors. Simply by returning to the
United States, the office said, that "surgically altered human being" could
be guilty of patent infringement for illegally importing herself.

Not all those concepts hold water with legal scholars. But the general
position was greatly strengthened two years ago when Rep. David Joseph
Weldon (R-Fla.) added a rider to an appropriations bill -- renewed this year
-- barring patents on humans or human embryos.

Still unresolved by that wording, however, is what is human and what is not.

Last week, patent officials conceded they lack a good way of defining the
"human" that Newman's patent supposedly too closely resembles.

The decision letter to Newman notes that many people have heart valves from
pigs. A patent has even issued on the use of baboon cells in people to aid
in organ transplantation. Those procedures, the letter says, "did not
convert the human patient to a non-human."

Similarly, mice that have up to 1 percent human brain cells in their skulls
are clearly mice, said Stanford University biologist Irving Weissman, one of
the scientists who helped make hybrid rodents.

The tricky part, all agree, is what to do with the middle ground. Weissman
and others, for example, have talked about their desire to make mice whose
brains are made entirely of human brain cells.

Hank Greely, a professor of law and director of Stanford's Center for Law
and the Biosciences, said even those animals would not seem very human to
him. "But a chimp brain with human neurons. . . ."

That's exactly the kind of scenario that makes Rifkin, Newman and others
want a total ban.

"If the U.S. Congress and president are not willing to do this now, then
there is no door that will remain closed to an era of commercial eugenics,"
Rifkin said. "We'll be on our way to that brave new world that Aldous Huxley
warned us about."

Leon Kass, chairman of the President's Council on Bioethics, agreed that
Congress should at least get involved.

"The patent office is not the place for society to make its moral
decisions," Kass said.

Weldon, the Florida representative, said he is interested in providing such
guidance -- and believes the public would favor restrictions.

"There's instant public revulsion when you start talking with the average
person about this stuff." For starters, Weldon said, "I'd like to ban the
creation of human embryos with animal genes in them."

But many scientists fear that Congress is likely to overreact.

"There are chimeras out there that serve very valuable purposes in medical
research, such as mice that make human antibodies," said Michael Werner,
chief of policy for the Biotechnology Industry Organization. "This is
sufficiently technical scientifically that it should be left to scientific
bodies like the National Academy of Sciences to decide."

That organization is now preparing a report, due in April, that will address
scientific and ethical issues relating to human-animal chimeras. And
although it will not probe deeply into intellectual-property issues, it may
at least offer the patent office -- and the nation -- a modicum of the
guidance it craves.

------------

-
Sonya  PLoS Medicine
The open-access general medical journal from the Public Library of Science
Inaugural issue: Autumn 2004   Share your discoveries with the world.
 http://www.plosmedicine.org


World Wide Eyes!

.S. DENIES PATENT FOR A TOO-HUMAN HYBRID
- e-mail: getalifestation@yahoo.co.uk

Upcoming Coverage
View and post events
Upcoming Events UK
24th October, London: 2015 London Anarchist Bookfair
2nd - 8th November: Wrexham, Wales, UK & Everywhere: Week of Action Against the North Wales Prison & the Prison Industrial Complex. Cymraeg: Wythnos o Weithredu yn Erbyn Carchar Gogledd Cymru

Ongoing UK
Every Tuesday 6pm-8pm, Yorkshire: Demo/vigil at NSA/NRO Menwith Hill US Spy Base More info: CAAB.

Every Tuesday, UK & worldwide: Counter Terror Tuesdays. Call the US Embassy nearest to you to protest Obama's Terror Tuesdays. More info here

Every day, London: Vigil for Julian Assange outside Ecuadorian Embassy

Parliament Sq Protest: see topic page
Ongoing Global
Rossport, Ireland: see topic page
Israel-Palestine: Israel Indymedia | Palestine Indymedia
Oaxaca: Chiapas Indymedia
Regions
All Regions
Birmingham
Cambridge
Liverpool
London
Oxford
Sheffield
South Coast
Wales
World
Other Local IMCs
Bristol/South West
Nottingham
Scotland
Social Media
You can follow @ukindymedia on indy.im and Twitter. We are working on a Twitter policy. We do not use Facebook, and advise you not to either.
Support Us
We need help paying the bills for hosting this site, please consider supporting us financially.
Other Media Projects
Schnews
Dissident Island Radio
Corporate Watch
Media Lens
VisionOnTV
Earth First! Action Update
Earth First! Action Reports
Topics
All Topics
Afghanistan
Analysis
Animal Liberation
Anti-Nuclear
Anti-militarism
Anti-racism
Bio-technology
Climate Chaos
Culture
Ecology
Education
Energy Crisis
Fracking
Free Spaces
Gender
Globalisation
Health
History
Indymedia
Iraq
Migration
Ocean Defence
Other Press
Palestine
Policing
Public sector cuts
Repression
Social Struggles
Technology
Terror War
Workers' Movements
Zapatista
Major Reports
NATO 2014
G8 2013
Workfare
2011 Census Resistance
Occupy Everywhere
August Riots
Dale Farm
J30 Strike
Flotilla to Gaza
Mayday 2010
Tar Sands
G20 London Summit
University Occupations for Gaza
Guantanamo
Indymedia Server Seizure
COP15 Climate Summit 2009
Carmel Agrexco
G8 Japan 2008
SHAC
Stop Sequani
Stop RWB
Climate Camp 2008
Oaxaca Uprising
Rossport Solidarity
Smash EDO
SOCPA
Past Major Reports
Encrypted Page
You are viewing this page using an encrypted connection. If you bookmark this page or send its address in an email you might want to use the un-encrypted address of this page.
If you recieved a warning about an untrusted root certificate please install the CAcert root certificate, for more information see the security page.

Global IMC Network


www.indymedia.org

Projects
print
radio
satellite tv
video

Africa

Europe
antwerpen
armenia
athens
austria
barcelona
belarus
belgium
belgrade
brussels
bulgaria
calabria
croatia
cyprus
emilia-romagna
estrecho / madiaq
galiza
germany
grenoble
hungary
ireland
istanbul
italy
la plana
liege
liguria
lille
linksunten
lombardia
madrid
malta
marseille
nantes
napoli
netherlands
northern england
nottingham imc
paris/île-de-france
patras
piemonte
poland
portugal
roma
romania
russia
sardegna
scotland
sverige
switzerland
torun
toscana
ukraine
united kingdom
valencia

Latin America
argentina
bolivia
chiapas
chile
chile sur
cmi brasil
cmi sucre
colombia
ecuador
mexico
peru
puerto rico
qollasuyu
rosario
santiago
tijuana
uruguay
valparaiso
venezuela

Oceania
aotearoa
brisbane
burma
darwin
jakarta
manila
melbourne
perth
qc
sydney

South Asia
india


United States
arizona
arkansas
asheville
atlanta
Austin
binghamton
boston
buffalo
chicago
cleveland
colorado
columbus
dc
hawaii
houston
hudson mohawk
kansas city
la
madison
maine
miami
michigan
milwaukee
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
nyc
oklahoma
philadelphia
pittsburgh
portland
richmond
rochester
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
sarasota
seattle
tampa bay
united states
urbana-champaign
vermont
western mass
worcester

West Asia
Armenia
Beirut
Israel
Palestine

Topics
biotech

Process
fbi/legal updates
mailing lists
process & imc docs
tech