The Case Of Mayo Collaborative Services V. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.

Creativity and the process of innovation are fertile grounds for psychological research, with applications spanning education, the arts, business and science. Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court took up the topic of creativity in the context of patent law. The case, Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., revisited a long-observed legal prohibition on patenting the "laws of nature" and illustrates one of the many ways in which law, particularly intellectual property law, can be informed and shaped by psychological principles.
At issue in Mayo was a series of patents issued to Prometheus Labs regarding the treatment of autoimmune diseases with a drug called thiopurine. Although use of the drug is widespread, finding the correct dosage for each patient had been difficult because …show more content…
While recognizing that every invention involves, to some extent, a law of nature, the court noted that the patents at issue added nothing new or original to the biological relationship between thiopurine and metabolite levels. The court held that allowing Prometheus Labs to patent such a discovery would stifle future research and innovation, violating the central goal of the patent system: to encourage innovation.
The court, in Mayo, identified the competing incentives created by the availability of patents: The rights granted by patents are intended to provide an economic incentive for innovation but may also restrict the flow of information and cross-fertilization of ideas among inventors. To balance these interests, patents are generally issued only for inventions that are novel, not obvious and useful. The court also recognized the breadth of the fields to which patent law (and, more broadly, intellectual property law) applies. Different types of creative activities may involve different aspects of