Patents:
A patent is a type of intellectual property granted by the federal government to a scientist or an organization that invented a new device, software, process, etc. to exclude others from the right of making, selling, or using an invention for the term of the patent as many as 20 years. The patent should be completely new, which is not obvious to the scientists of the same level and should have an immediate use for public. Also patents cannot be from the nature and world physical laws.
There has been a lot of uncertainty about what can be patented especially about genome sequences, embryo, and DNA amplification techniques (basically everything that naturally exists in human body and it is common in everyone) before 2013, but after …show more content…
One of these debates took place on the patent licensed to Myriad Genetics Incorporation related to BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation genes. Myriad’s patent and the benefits provided to the inventor failed utilitarian moral principals and considered immoral. Based on the basic utilitarian moral principals (Jeremy Bentham 1748-1832 and John Stuart Mill 1808-1873), acts that bring pleasure and benefit for most people are considered right and acts that bring harm and pain to the most people are considered wrong. Myriad’s patent restricted the right of performing tests on the DNA sequences for other scientists in their own labs and blocked the general utility of such sequences. So based of utilitarian point of view, patents on genes and other life forms are only acceptable if general utility will not decline by the fact that the inventor will profit. Myriad’s patent also fails deontological arguments (Immanuel Kant 1724-1804). Two basic principals of Kant were: 1) everyone should have full authority over one’s body, and 2) everyone should be fully respected and should not merely be used as a mean to an end. Based on these principals, patents do not interfere with the one’s body using its own genes but they restrict one’s right to consciously study their own gene sequences and
A patent is a type of intellectual property granted by the federal government to a scientist or an organization that invented a new device, software, process, etc. to exclude others from the right of making, selling, or using an invention for the term of the patent as many as 20 years. The patent should be completely new, which is not obvious to the scientists of the same level and should have an immediate use for public. Also patents cannot be from the nature and world physical laws.
There has been a lot of uncertainty about what can be patented especially about genome sequences, embryo, and DNA amplification techniques (basically everything that naturally exists in human body and it is common in everyone) before 2013, but after …show more content…
One of these debates took place on the patent licensed to Myriad Genetics Incorporation related to BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation genes. Myriad’s patent and the benefits provided to the inventor failed utilitarian moral principals and considered immoral. Based on the basic utilitarian moral principals (Jeremy Bentham 1748-1832 and John Stuart Mill 1808-1873), acts that bring pleasure and benefit for most people are considered right and acts that bring harm and pain to the most people are considered wrong. Myriad’s patent restricted the right of performing tests on the DNA sequences for other scientists in their own labs and blocked the general utility of such sequences. So based of utilitarian point of view, patents on genes and other life forms are only acceptable if general utility will not decline by the fact that the inventor will profit. Myriad’s patent also fails deontological arguments (Immanuel Kant 1724-1804). Two basic principals of Kant were: 1) everyone should have full authority over one’s body, and 2) everyone should be fully respected and should not merely be used as a mean to an end. Based on these principals, patents do not interfere with the one’s body using its own genes but they restrict one’s right to consciously study their own gene sequences and