Till date there is no controversial issue on patenting a large number of proteins, unlike genomic sequences. Also, all the research and protein patenting activity has not yielded large rewards in-turn unless the protein is used as a drug target or as therapeutics.
These days large-scale protein identification is making identifying proteins easier. Projects in the US and Japan have shown that they can quickly determine the structure of thousands of previously unknown proteins, providing many new drug development targets to patent.
Concern: if that patent is broadly written, others may be prevented from working on it, effectively 'ring-fencing' the protein.
Current Scenario: In the past US researchers have relied on a research exemption to avoid this problem, but this might be set to change. In a recent ruling by the Supreme Court, the research exemption was used by Duke University to defend its work on a technology patented by a previous employee. The Supreme Court decided in favour of the employee, stating that the University was not indulging in philosophical inquiry, as allowed by the research exemption, but in active research for gain. If precedent is set and the research exemption is disallowed for those working with patented proteins, work could be hindered.
Further steps to find a solution: The NIH has funded a study at the National Academy of Sciences to look into the potential impact on research of broadly interpreted patents on proteins and other biological molecules.
No comments:
Post a Comment