Table of Contents

Individualism and Collectiveness in Intellectual Property Law

Individualism and Collectiveness in Intellectual Property Law

ATRIP Intellectual Property series

Edited by Jan Rosén

Individualism and Collectiveness in Intellectual Property Law embraces fundamental, eternal and yet very contemporary elements in IP law dealt with in all parts of the world. There are certain classic values embedded in the protection of human effort and the creativeness of individuals. This book examines the relationship of those values to the questions inherent both in individual creativeness in a collective setting, and in the tendency to build national, regional or global monopolies based on IP rights. The respect for original ownership, the occasional need for collective management of IP rights, the idiosyncrasies of co-ownership of rights and the ever present tension to be found in encounters between exploitation of IP rights and competition law are extensively exposed in this book.

Chapter 4: Individualism, Collectivism and Openness in Patent Law: From Exclusion to Inclusion through Licensing

Geertrui Van Overwalle

Subjects: law - academic, intellectual property law


Geertrui Van Overwalle INTRODUCTION 1. Recently, a shock wave swept through the biotechnology community when Judge Robert W. Sweet of the District Court for the Southern District of New York decided to deny patent protection for isolated human genes and associated diagnostic methods. The case related to genetic tests for familial breast and ovarian cancer developed by Myriad Genetics.1 Although the decision has been appealed  2 and may well be reversed in light of the Bilski case,3 many of the concerns relating to the impact of gene patenting, which are extensively discussed in this case, will continue to exist. The Myriad case is an exponent of a systemic problem. The disputed issues in the Myriad case point to the uneasy relationship between human genomic science and intellectual property (IP). The debate particularly revolves around the alleged hindering effect of single, blocking patents, on the one hand, and patent thickets, on the other hand, in the area of genetics. Inspired by the ongoing exchange of ideas on distinct modes of ownership and their respective impact on exclusivity and competition,4 the 1 Association for Molecular Pathology v. USPTO, Southern District of New York (March 29, 2010). For details and discussion of the Myriad decision, see Geertrui Van Overwalle, ‘Turning patent swords into shares’, 330 Science, 2010, 1630–1631; Isabelle Huys, Geertrui Van Overwalle and Gert Matthijs, ‘Gene and genetic diagnostic method patents. A comparison under current European and US patent law’, European Journal of Human Genetics (EJHG), 2011, June 8....

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information