User:Mac/Agenda/18 Jan 2010

IP Practices are Harmful?

According to ACMG (American College of Medical Genetics) president, Dr. Bruce Korf,

"The practice of gene patenting and exclusive licensing has created monopolies that stifle innovation and limit access, exactly the opposite effects that patents are supposed to promote. The SACGHS report represents a step towards breaking up this logjam."

Do Gene Patents Hurt Research? The Data Say They Don’t

DTC refs

• US Library of Medicine page on DTC testing

• Direct to consumer genetic testing: Avoiding a culture war

• American college of medical genetics

• ASHG Statement* on Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing in the United States

Multiplex Molecular Diagnostic Companies and Market Reports

• Molecular Diagnostics: A Dynamic and Rapidly Broadening Market Table of Contents

• Multiplex Assays in Translational Medicine: Technologies, Applications, and Future Directions

• Multiplex Assays: Evolving Technologies, Applications and Future Directions Report Overview

• MarketResearch - The World Market for Molecular Diagnostics - Kalorama 2009 - pg 56-61.pdf

Add to the Bibliography

From Carol's GENE PATENTS AND PUBLIC HEALTH forwarded email:

First and foremost, there is a book on designing models to deal with patent thickets:

VAN OVERWALLE, G. (ed.), Gene Patents and Collaborative Licensing Models. Patent Pools, Clearinghouses, Open Source Models and Liability Regimes, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2009, 477 p. http://www.cambridge.org/uk/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521896733

This looks really good. Chapters on clearing houses, patent pools, and open source models for dx.

Furthermore, we would like to draw your attention to a book that focuses on how to deal with blocking patents by way of compulsory licensing:

VAN OVERWALLE, G. (ed.), Gene Patents and Public Health, Brussels, Bruylant, 2007, 241 p. http://www.bruylant.be/st/en/fiche.php?id=12661

Multiple chapters about licensing and patenting of genetic diagnositcs, focus on EU.

The final results of the empirical research on patent landscapes have been published this autumn in Nature:

HUYS, I., BERTHELS, N., MATTHIJS, G. and VAN OVERWALLE, G., ‘Legal Uncertainty in the Area of Genetic Diagnostic Testing’, 27, Nature Biotechnology, October 2009, 903-909, doi:10.1038/nbt1009-903 http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v27/n10/abs/nbt1009-903.html

And, last but not least, we are happy to announce that the final results of the tandem project in Europe and Australia on the survey “Patent Licensing in Medical Biotechnology” will soon be made available:

VAN ZIMMEREN, E., VANNESTE, S. and VAN OVERWALLE, G., ‘Patent Licensing in Medical Biotechnology in Europe: A Role for Collaborative Licensing Strategies?’, Leuven, Acco, 2010

NICOL, D., ‘Patent Licensing in Medical Biotechnology in Australia: A Role for Collaborative Licensing Strategies?’, Hobart (Tasmania, Australia), Centre for Law and Genetics Occasional Paper No. 7, 2009

Huang, Kenneth G. and Murray, Fiona E., Does Patent Strategy Shape the Long-Run Supply of Public Knowledge? Evidence from Human Genetics (September 1, 2008). Academy of Management Journal, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1249522 - referenced in the SACGHS final draft (lines 318-20)