Skip to content
Can (or Should) We Patent Nature?

Can (or Should) We Patent Nature?

Writing for a unanimous Supreme Court majority, Justice Clarence Thomas argued that Myriad Genetics Inc. did not invent anything when it isolated two genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2. 

Writing for a unanimous Supreme Court majority, Justice Clarence Thomas argued that Myriad Genetics Inc. did not invent anything when it isolated two genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, which can be used to indicate if a woman is at risk of developing breast cancer or ovarian cancer.


“To be sure, [Myriad] found an important and useful gene,” Thomas wrote, “but separating that gene from its surrounding genetic material is not an act of invention.”

Smarter faster: the Big Think newsletter
Subscribe for counterintuitive, surprising, and impactful stories delivered to your inbox every Thursday

Therefore, Myriad was not eligible for patents. Mother Nature seems to have a better patent claim. 

What do you think?

Can (or Should) We Patent Nature?


Related

Up Next