Cops welcomed with smoke bombs and flares Dublin Pride 19:57 Jul 14 0 comments Gemma O'Doherty: The speech you never heard. I wonder why? 05:28 Jan 15 0 comments A Decade of Evidence Demonstrates The Dramatic Failure Of Globalisation 15:39 Aug 23 1 comments Thatcher's " blind eye" to paedophilia 15:27 Mar 12 0 comments Total Revolution. A new philosophy for the 21st century. 15:55 Nov 17 0 comments more >>Blog Feeds
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005RTEs Sarah McInerney ? Fianna Fail?supporter? Anthony Joe Duffy is dishonest and untrustworthy Anthony Robert Watt complaint: Time for decision by SIPO Anthony RTE in breach of its own editorial principles Anthony Waiting for SIPO Anthony
Human Rights in IrelandPromoting Human Rights in Ireland
Lockdown Skeptics
In Welcoming Trump, Let Us Remember Henry VIII Fri Jan 24, 2025 19:00 | Joanna Gray
Have Covid Travel Requirements Gone Away? Fri Jan 24, 2025 17:00 | Dr Roger Watson
A Golden Age for American Meritocracy Fri Jan 24, 2025 14:15 | Darren Gee
Think Tank?s Net Zero Survey Concludes the Public is the Problem Fri Jan 24, 2025 13:10 | Ben Pile
Number of Children Who Think They are Wrong Sex Surges 50-Fold Fri Jan 24, 2025 11:10 | Will Jones
Voltaire NetworkVoltaire, international editionVoltaire, International Newsletter #117 Fri Jan 24, 2025 19:54 | en The United States bets its hegemony on the Fourth Industrial Revolution Fri Jan 24, 2025 19:26 | en For Thierry Meyssan, the Sarkozy trial for illegal financing of the 2007 preside... Fri Jan 24, 2025 19:23 | en Should we condemn or not the glorification of Nazism?, by Thierry Meyssan Wed Jan 22, 2025 14:05 | en Voltaire, International Newsletter N?116 Sat Jan 18, 2025 06:46 | en |
'Luch' at this - a bump in the road for TRIPS
national |
miscellaneous |
news report
Thursday December 05, 2002 22:49 by Daithi
'Higher life forms' are not 'inventions', apparently In a victory for opponents of overbroad intellectual property laws, the highest Canadian court rejected an attempt by researchers at Harvard to obtain a patent over a genetically modified mouse (and the process used to 'create' it) This is the final stage in a long court battle between Harvard and campaigners (environmentalists, religious groups and groups opposed to the commercial appropriation of both nature and science) - two years ago a federal court overturned a refusal to grant a patent to Harvard - originally the patent office held that they could only grant patents for 'inventions', and the mouse in question was not such an invention. Today's split decision restores that ruling. It's important to know that patents have been obtained in many other countries for this research - and there has of course been much wailing and gnashing of teeth on the part of the big scientific companies here in Canada, worried that their valuable IP rights will be undermined - the calls for Canada to "fall into line" with the rest of the world have come already. Those who oppose this type of research in principle say that it will become economically unviable for it to be carried out without patent protection - while advocates of greater IP freedom, opponents of TRIPS, will say that this decision is important for another reason, acting as a warning to the biotech industry that life itself cannot be patented and that the results of this type of research are of such importance to humanity, they should be available freely to all scientists. Both camps agree that the Canadian parliament now has the opportunity to define the limits of patentability and indeed the moral/ethical limits of what is acceptable in science - and that the biotech industry will lobby hard to retain their unimpeded position of privilege and power. Ironically this decision comes on the same day as a separate announcement about the mouse genome. This is just a small obstacle in the way of the TRIPS juggernaut, but it is a sign of hope to some countries, in the developing world in particular, that are not prepared to accept that what can be protected in the US (and the EU) should be protected worldwide. RESOURCES: The full text of the case (summary provided and it is relatively readable, the majority (5-4 split) judgement is by Bastarache: see this address: http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/rec/html/harvard.en.html (238K HTML) Canadian Catholic Organisation for Development and Peace: BIOTec Canada (who are very upset): CBC (Canadian public broadcaster): |
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (1 of 1)
Jump To Comment: 1there are many international "test cases" as in many may start precendents or be historic rulings, they are in our sphere of influence and interest.
China v. USA on well everything to do with patent.
Russia v. USA on well MP3 files and
a Russian version of Harry Potter.
note the case is USA v. Russia.
today read rulings concerning the Russian and US side of things on freedown loads of books.
http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=ODM21R1KO1CBGCRBAELCFFA?type=technologyNews&storyID=1861146