The Silence of Biotech Guidelines

Not surprisingly, the draft biotechnology guidelines issued by the patent office speak very little. Discretionary statements, opinionated decisions and voice of presumed public sentiments have played an important role for conclusions at most instances. For example, the guidelines state that stem cells are not patentable because they are against morality and public order. Same with terminator technology and so on. Why are these inventions against public order and morality? SILENCE!!!

Another example, identification of a specific gene sequence and characterization of its function from a gene library does not give rise to patent eligibility. Why? SILENCE!!! How can you patent a sequence that is already listed in a gene library? Is it not self explanatory? Those of you, who are biotech scientists will wonder why.

Another interesting revelation to those looking for biotech patents is: chemical inventions have many parallels to those in biotechnology. Therefore, you can make patent decisions based on principles in chemical cases. The divide elucidated by scholars,, courts and patent offices across the world seem to be of no or very little consequence. Again Why? SILENCE. Good luck biotech patent attorneys … It is not just silence that awaits you. It will be a hard fight against rejection when there is slightest uncertainty and this seems to be the order of the mind
Some of our comments to the guidelines are here for your reference.
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Leave a Reply