[MPWG] Fwd: Science News in Depth

[Josef Brinckmann]

This looks like it:
United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). 2014 Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility. Federal Register. 16 December 2014;79(241):74618-74633: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2014-12-16/pdf/2014-29414.pdf
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: De Angelis, Patricia 
  To: mpwg 
  Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 6:35 AM
  Subject: [MPWG] Fwd: Science News in Depth


  A recent Science article (below) describes latest guidance from the U.S. patent office regarding patents on nature and mentions a public comment period that is open until March.  I was unable to locate the actual notice for public comment on the USPTO website; if anyone else knows where to find it, please share it with the list.



  Intellectual Property Rights are important when it comes to medicinal plants. US law does not currently allow patents to be taken directly on natural compounds that are readily found in nature (and this new guidance does not change that). Rather, patents are allowed on the processes used to arrive at those compounds, though the natural compound is generally the ultimate "target." 


  So the questions that arise concern the balance between traditional healthcare knowledge and drug discovery (which often relies on traditional knowledge to zero in on compounds). Should individuals, researchers, or companies claim patent rights to natural plant compounds that are part of traditional knowledge systems handed down over the centuries? How do we ensure that a patent does not infringe on people's ability to continue using these plants for medicine? 


  Intellectual Property
  U.S. patent office reworks unpopular policy
  Kelly Servick
  The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is again changing how it evaluates inventions derived from nature. Recent Supreme Court decisions, including a 2013 ruling that struck down patents on human genes, forced USPTO to tighten its rules about what is eligible for patent protection. But the agency drew fire with its first attempt to set a new standard this past March, which raised the eligibility bar for many biotech products. Critics warned that they would chill investment and render new therapies and diagnostics unpatentable. USPTO is now seeking feedback on a revised set of guidelines, which many of those critics see as an improvement, though it's not yet clear how they will be implemented.

  Full Science article:  http://www.sciencemagazinedigital.org/sciencemagazine/09_january_2015?folio=113#pg13




------------------------------------------------------------------------------



  _______________________________________________
  PCA's Medicinal Plant Working Group mailing list
  MPWG at lists.plantconservation.org
  http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org

  To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to MPWG-request at lists.plantconservation.org with the word "unsubscribe" in the subject line.

  Disclaimer
  Any advice given on this list regarding diagnosis or treatments etc. reflects ONLY the opinion of the individual who posts the message. The information contained in posts is not intended nor implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice relative to your specific medical condition or question. All medical and other healthcare information that is discussed on this list should be carefully reviewed by the individual reader and their qualified healthcare professional. Posts do not reflect any official opinions or positions of the Plant Conservation Alliance.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20150115/164db31d/attachment.html>