WASHINGTON, D.C. June 13 (DPI) — With rare unanimity readers on comment boards across the net applauded the US Supreme Court’s decision to deny patent protection to companies that have identified human genetic material.
Some readers expressed surprise that the matter even reached the Supreme Court. Reinforcing that view, the court ruled 9-0 that human genes are not patentable.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/us/supreme-court-rules-human-genes-may-not-be-patented.html?hp
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the court’s opinion that breast-cancer genes isolated by Myriad Genetics are products of nature, and thus aren’t eligible for patent.
“Myriad did not create anything,” Justice Thomas wrote in his 18-page opinion. “To be sure, it found an important and useful gene, but separating that gene from its surrounding genetic material is not an act of invention.”
Even if a discovery is groundbreaking, that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s patentable, the court said.
Readers across the political spectrum lauded the decision – the word “sanity” was used several times. A WSJ reader wrote: “A unanimous decision by the court for the public good. Good for us all.”
In the face of such unanimity, readers sparred with each other smaller issues, such as whether Monsanto Corp. will continue to have a right to patent genetically modified plants. “Is Monsato an illegal business?” asked one WSJ.com reader. “They have patented genes of plants for decades and wrecked havoc for farmers? Shouldn’t they be shut down for running an illegal operation???? It would be good for evolution and human beings.”
But overall the sentiment among readers was roundly positive — and supportive of the court. Below are highest recommended comments on NYTimes.com, in order:
1) “It has been awhile since I have fully agreed with a Supreme Court decision. Thank you for this one. I feared the corporation-loving faction would have sway.”
2) “A good start. Now can we talk about abolishing corporate personhood?”
3) “Halleluah! Finally a common sense ruling from the Supreme Court.
It is scary to think that such a fundamental human right was even at risk. Corporations like Myriad Genetics and Monsanto are out of control.”
4) “This is a fantastic ruling.
No one invents nature. We discover nature. Discovery is not property. People get credit for discovery but they don’t own what they discovered. Inventions are property.
This ruling opens the door for unhindered scientific research without fear of patent litigation. Products that are created from the discovery can then be patented, as they should be.
The Court got this one right.”
5) “I have a Ph.D. in the biological sciences so can speak with some knowledge. We do not need businesses “investing in understanding genetic material.” We need research institutes investing in understanding genetic material. Supported by government funds for science.”