Skip Navigation

Patenting human pluripotent cells: balancing commercial, academic and ethical interests

  1. G. Bahadur1,2,4 and
  2. M. Morrison3
  1. 1North Middlesex University Hospital Trust, Sterling Way, London, Greater London N18 1QX, UK
  2. 2Centre for Reproductive Ethics and Rights, UCL Institute for Women's Health, 88-96 Chenies Mews, London WC1E 6HX, UK
  3. 3Science and Technology Studies Unit (SATSU), Department of Sociology, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK
  1. 4Correspondence address. E-mail: bahadur.g{at}gmail.com
  • Received July 16, 2009.
  • Revision received August 5, 2009.
  • Accepted August 25, 2009.

Abstract

The article addresses the issue of the ethics of patenting in human embryonic stem (hES) cells. The current stance of the European Patent Office in citing moral objections to patents on hES cells and the monopolistic scope of the Wisconsin Research Alumni Fund/Geron patents granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office represent twin obstacles to achieving an ethical balance in patent rights in this field. The particular issues and strategies around granting patents on hES cells can be better understood by placing them in the context of the biotechnology industry and its role in the global bioeconomy. Some possible avenues of redress are considered based on the potential to open up cell pluripotency as new terrain for intellectual property offered by new technological breakthroughs such as induced pluripotent cells. Any changes in patent law should be accompanied by increased collaboration through devices such as patent pools.

Key words

    This Article

    1. Hum. Reprod. (2009) doi: 10.1093/humrep/dep369 First published online: November 7, 2009
    1. » AbstractFree
    2. Full Text (HTML)Free
    3. Full Text (PDF)Free
    4. All Versions of this Article:
      1. dep369v1
      2. 25/1/14 most recent

    Classifications

    Responses

    1. Submit a response
    2. No responses published

    Share

    1. Email this article

    People also read [Beta]

    Current Issue

    1. February 2012 27 (2)
    1. Human Reproduction
    1. Alert me to new issues

    Most

    Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.