2012
DOI: 10.1007/s11693-012-9098-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Synthetic biology, patenting, health and global justice

Abstract: The legal and moral issues that synthetic biology (SB) and its medical applications are likely to raise with regard to intellectual property (IP) and patenting are best approached through the lens of a theoretical framework highlighting the ''co-construction'' or ''co-evolution'' of patent law and technology. The current situation is characterized by a major contest between the so-called IP frame and the access-to-knowledge frame. In SB this contest is found in the contrasting approaches of Craig Venter's chas… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In ''Global health requires more than technological fixes'' section we already referred to this in connection to Koplan et al (2009) who have stressed the importance in global health of real partnership between 'developed' and 'developing' countries. In a similar vein, other authors have emphasized the need for network governance and community based approaches in order to bridge important translational gaps in the fight against poverty related diseases (Smits et al 2008).…”
Section: This Specialmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In ''Global health requires more than technological fixes'' section we already referred to this in connection to Koplan et al (2009) who have stressed the importance in global health of real partnership between 'developed' and 'developing' countries. In a similar vein, other authors have emphasized the need for network governance and community based approaches in order to bridge important translational gaps in the fight against poverty related diseases (Smits et al 2008).…”
Section: This Specialmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These property rights are exercised through exclusion and exchange. The “costs imposed on society” mentioned at the end of the statement are in most cases based on assumptions that any costs (monetary or otherwise) that come from protecting an invention through legally enforceable private property rights are balanced by the possible benefits arising from the public disclosure of inventions—a balance that some scholars question in part because it is an assumption that is difficult, if not impossible, to measure (Biagioli 2019 ; van den Belt 2013 ). Produced through a series of quite rigid institutional processes, IP can be viewed as the commodified version of a scientific output.…”
Section: Ip and Transdisciplinary Co-designmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The same occurs today with the 'public order of morality' criteria. European patent law excludes from patentability any inventions whose commercial exploitation would be contrary to 'public order of morality' (OECD, 2014;Van den Belt, 2013).…”
Section: Why the Recent Patent Litigation Over The Crispr-cas 9 Genom...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…CRISPR technology is in many regards so different from classical approaches in genetic engineering that it is entirely justified to find new solutions in the field of IPR as well. The idea that the same IPR models can be applied to all fields of technology for all times no longer holds (Van den Belt, 2013;Rutz, 2009).…”
Section: Efforts For Open Access To Knowledge In the Whole Field Of S...mentioning
confidence: 99%