Financing and Protection of Stem Cells Research Results in Europe and the Usa (original) (raw)
2020, Archibald Reiss Days
Stem cell research is the foundation of the construction of the entire human organism, that is, life arises from them. Research should provide a better understanding of stem cell differentiation and development, with possible implications for the cure of hitherto incurable diseases. The therapeutic possibilities of stem cells are enormous, as are the funds that are invested in their research. Researchers, but mostly biotechnology companies, are committed to securing a monopoly over research results in the form of patents. The number of granted patents related to stem cells has dropped significantly in the last decade, not only in Europe but also in the United States. The question arises as to whether the restrictive stem cell patent policy in Europe or the restrictive public funding policy for research in the United States, has contributed more to this. The issue of who finances the inventor's efforts in this sensitive area is extremely important and has a great influence on the issue of who controls and who is the owner, i.e. the right holder over the patent-protected research results. The stagnation of university research and leaving the leading role to the private sector in this area is not in the interest of the social community. The social community must not allow private companies to play a leading role in investing, then reaping the benefits, but also in the exclusive competence over therapies. Public funding and "opening up research results" will help efficient, ethically responsible, and lawbased progress in stem cell research and patenting.
Related papers
Proliferating Patent Problems with Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research?
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 2006
The scientific challenges and ethical controversies facing human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research continue to command attention. The issues posed by patenting hESC technologies have, however, largely failed to penetrate the discourse, much less result in political action. This paper examines U.S. and European patent systems, illustrating discrepancies in the patentability of hESC technologies and identifying potential negative consequences associated with efforts to make available hESC research tools for basic research purposes while at same time strengthening the position of certain patent-holders' rights. Differences between the U.S. and the European contexts may in part explain why the course of hESC research in those jurisdictions ultimately diverges. Nevertheless, questions about whether and how patenting, related agreements, and licensing practices progress and shape the field of hESC research in both the U.S., Europe, and elsewhere must no longer be marginalised. These questions are fundamentally important in determining what benefits are likely to result from hESC research. Assuring these benefits is the moral issue with which patent systems are most intrinsically concerned, and that governments must begin to directly address rather than assume or ignore.
Stem Cell Patenting in the European Union
2012
As a European intellectual property lawyer, the author is often struck by the amount of comparative analysis in the area of intellectual property which adopts US intellectual property laws, rather than European ones, as their point of comparison. This seems strange when in many respects US intellectual property laws have their own unique features and when European such laws are often more closely aligned with the laws of most other countries in the world. This series of articles aims to expand knowledge of and to explain something of European intellectual property laws; how they got to their present state, what are current hot topics in them, where they are heading and why they matter. This third article in the series will focus on stem cell patenting in the European Union.
Pros and cons of patenting stem cells
2020
The evolution and transformation of research in the field of biotechnology are clearly reflected in patent rules. In view of further development of biotechnology and the pressure from multinational biotechnical companies, gene patenting was first granted in some legal systems in order to initiate the regulation of patent protection of stem cells. Further research should provide a better understanding of the differentiation and development of stem cells, including their potential effects in curing previously incurable diseases. It should also engender new ways of exploring fundamental issues in biology, such as the mechanism of cell growth. Therefore, researchers and primarily biotech companies advocate in favor of ensuring the monopoly on the results of their research. Such a monopoly is secured by patent law. Although remarkable progress has been made in the research of stem cells, many aspects of their use, especially of embryonic cells, have not been fully clarified and made comp...
The study of human embryonic stem cells (hESCs), despite their potential therapeutic usefulness, has raised numerous ethical, legal and political concerns because the derivation of the stem cell lines requires the destruction of human embryos. An alternative method for deriving pluripotent cell lines from human parthenotes raises questions about whether these lines are captured by extant legal definitions of the human embryo in the European Union. This paper analyzes the 2012 decision of the German Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof or BGH) in the Oliver Brüstle case, a ruling that allows the derivation of hESCs using methods that do not destroy embryos. We also discuss a recent decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). In the context of parthenogenesis, the court has been ruled that the term "capable of commencing the process of development of a human being" must be understood as meaning that, in order to be classified as a ‘human embryo’, a non-fertilized human ovum must necessarily have the inherent capacity to develop into a human being. We discuss this in light of the recent European Patent Office (EPO) decision, which, unlike the BGH decision, has revoked the corresponding Brüstle’s European patent. We conclude by arguing that the BGH and the CJEU rulings offer hope to overseas inventors of hESC technologies seeking protection for their intellectual property in Europe.
Review of Challenges in the Commercialization of StemCell Research Technologies
2020
Stem cell technology, due to its high potential, is experiencing rapid growth in practical therapeutic applications. How patents affect the stem cell research industry continues to remains in chaos. The patent system’s main aim is to promote creativity by giving the patent proprietor a provisional monopoly over the patented invention. Patent security is a key factor that influences the creation and commercial success of innovations in the regenerative medicine and life sciences. Biomedicine innovation in stem cell research demands balance between the various stakeholder interests. This paper explores etiological factors contributing to the current problems of patentability of human stem cell-based innovations in the stem cell research market.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.