Vitamin B Case Reaches Supreme Court
There have been some interesting developments in an appeal of a ruling against a company sued for copyright infringement involving Vitamin B12 (folic acid) and a method used in diagnosing it's possible deficiency in humans.
The case, which is now being heard before the Supreme Court, could have a major impact on patent law, especially as to how it applies to particular genes and medical processes. At issue is the diagnosing of a folic acid deficiency. The current method, which involves testing for an elevated level of a particular amino acid, is used millions of times every year. Each time it is used, the hospital is supposed to pay a royalty to Metabolite, which patented the idea that the elevated amino acid level correlates to a Vitamin B12 deficiency.
Should they have been able to obtain that patent? That's what LabCorp, a company that refused to pay the royalty fee, is asking the courts. Although the case itself does not deal directly with patenting genes and therefore will not set precedent in that area, the Supreme Court has asked a question to the federal government which could undoubtedly be used by lawyers fighting individual gene patents: have inventors been patenting laws of nature, natural pehnomena, and abstract ideas. Those things may not be patented, and if the Supreme Court rules that this testing process falls under one of those categories, it would certainly seem that genes would fall there as well.
Right now there are literally dozens of companies working hard to develop drugs that can isolate certain genes, which has allowed them to get patents on those genes. This ruling could throw out that entire practice.
Although I am a firm believer in most free-market economies, our patent system really just creates monopolies in some fields, such as medicine. Because most companies are just sitting on gene patents, preventing any other companies from doing any useful work on those genes, this should be great news for the medical community, and society as a whole.
cbs4boston.com - B Vitamin Case Reaches Supreme Court
The case, which is now being heard before the Supreme Court, could have a major impact on patent law, especially as to how it applies to particular genes and medical processes. At issue is the diagnosing of a folic acid deficiency. The current method, which involves testing for an elevated level of a particular amino acid, is used millions of times every year. Each time it is used, the hospital is supposed to pay a royalty to Metabolite, which patented the idea that the elevated amino acid level correlates to a Vitamin B12 deficiency.
Should they have been able to obtain that patent? That's what LabCorp, a company that refused to pay the royalty fee, is asking the courts. Although the case itself does not deal directly with patenting genes and therefore will not set precedent in that area, the Supreme Court has asked a question to the federal government which could undoubtedly be used by lawyers fighting individual gene patents: have inventors been patenting laws of nature, natural pehnomena, and abstract ideas. Those things may not be patented, and if the Supreme Court rules that this testing process falls under one of those categories, it would certainly seem that genes would fall there as well.
Right now there are literally dozens of companies working hard to develop drugs that can isolate certain genes, which has allowed them to get patents on those genes. This ruling could throw out that entire practice.
Although I am a firm believer in most free-market economies, our patent system really just creates monopolies in some fields, such as medicine. Because most companies are just sitting on gene patents, preventing any other companies from doing any useful work on those genes, this should be great news for the medical community, and society as a whole.
cbs4boston.com - B Vitamin Case Reaches Supreme Court