Advertisement

Biotechnology Patenting Policy in the European Union – as Exemplified by the Development in Germany

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology book series (ABE, volume 107)

Abstract

Patenting of biotechnological inventions is an important concomitant side effect of progress in this field, but also a matter of dispute in the public. In this paper, the significance of and the prerequisites for patenting are reviewed, and the principal requirements for biotechnology patents in the signatory states of the European Patent Convention (EPC) are summarized. This is followed by a report on the historical development of biotech-patent legislation in Europe and in Germany as one contracting state to EPC and member state of the European Union. Characteristic features of the patenting policy in Europe and Germany are illustrated by critical examples of biotechnology patents or patent applications. Some examples illustrate the influence of the European Union's national states' case laws after these had crystallized into the EU Biotechnology Directive (1998), which later was adopted by the European Patent Organization into its Implementing Regulations (2001) and was implemented into national patent acts. Some frequent objections against patenting in modern biotechnology are considered. More and better information about prerequisites, consequences, and opportunities of patenting in biotechnology, if conveyed to science and technology scholars as multipliers, may help to rationalize public discussion.

Biotechnology patent regulations (Europe, Germany)  
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Pasteur L (1873) US Patent 141072 (expired) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chakrabarty AM, Chou G, Gunsalus IC (1973) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 70:1137 PubMedCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chakrabarty AM (1981) US Patent 4259444 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cohen S, Boyer H (1973) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 70:1293 PubMedCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cohen S, Boyer H (1973) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 70:3240 PubMedCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cohen S, Boyer H (1980) US Patent 4237224 Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hammar F (2002) Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol 75:1 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fiechter A (2000) Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol 69:175 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    European Patent Convention 2000 as adopted by decision of the Administrative Council of 28 June 2001, (2003) OJ EPO, Special Edition No. 1 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    German Patent Act of 1981, last amended by the law of 29 August 2005 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pfaller W (2004) http://www.wolfgang-pfaller.de , last visited: Feb 2007
  12. 12.
    Pohlmann H (1960) GRUR 6:272 Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Straus J (1997) The present state of the patent system in the European Union—as compared with the Situation in the United States of America and Japan, Study in connection with the EC Commissions 1996 Green Paper on Innovation, EUR 17014 EN, Luxembourg; http://www.suepo.org/public/docs/2001/straus.pdf , last visited: Feb 2007
  14. 14.
    Straus J (2001) Grace Period and the European and International Patent Law. C.H. Beck, München Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Trilateral Project B3b (2001) Mutual Understanding in Search and Examination, Report on Comparative Studies on Biotechnology Patent Practises, EPO, JPO, USPTO, San Francisco, Cal; http://www.trilateral.net/projects/other_project/business_method/ last visited: Feb 2007
  16. 16.
    Schulte R (2001) Patentgesetz mit Europäischem Patentübereinkommen, 6th edn. Heymanns, Köln, p 14 Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Implementing regulations to the European Patent Convention 2000 as adopted by decision of the Administrative Council of 7 December 2006 Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions, (1998) OJ Europ Commun 30 July, L 213/13 EN Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    European Commission (2002) Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council - Development and implications of patent law in the field of biotechnology and genetic engineering, p 17; http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/rpt/2002/com2002_0545en01.pdf , last visited: Feb 2007
  20. 20.
    Recital (38), Biotechnology Directive 98/44/EC Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Avery OT, MacLeod CM, McCarty M (1944) J Exp Med 79:137 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Watson JD, Crick FHC (1953) Nature 171:737 PubMedCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jacob F, Monod J (1961) J Mol Biol 3:318 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nirenberg M, Matthaei JH (1961) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 47:1588 PubMedCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bundespatentgericht (1969) XZB 15/67, GRUR 672 Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sundt E, Ohloff G (1970) DE Patent 2008254 Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sundt E, Ohloff G (1973) CH Patent 532368 Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bundespatentgericht (1978) 16W(pat) 81/77, GRUR 12:702 Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Straus J, Moufang R (1990) Deposit and Release of Biological Material for the Purposes of Patent Procedure. Nomos, Baden-Baden Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bundesgesetzblatt (2005) Biomaterial Hinterlegungsverordnung vom 28. Januar 2005, Tl I, Nr 2, p 151 Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Leder P, Stewart TA (1992) EP Patent 0169672 Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    T 19/90 - 3.3.2 (1990) OJ EPO 476 Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Leder P, Stewart TA (1988) US Patent 4736866 Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    T 356/93 - 3.3.4 (1995) OJ EPO 545 Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    De Clerq A, Krebbers E, Vanderkerckhove JS, De Castro L, Gander E, Van Montagu M (1996) EP Patent 0318341 B1 Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Transgenic plant/NOVARTIS II (2000) OJ EPO 111 Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hohn T, Peters C, Salmeron JM, Reed JN, Dawson JL (2000) PCT Patent Appl WO 00/60061; EP Patent 1173553 Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Beier FK, Crespi RS, Straus J (1985) Biotechnology and Patent Protection—An International Review. OECD, Paris Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bill of the Federal Government for the implementing of Directive 98/44/EC into German Law (2003); German Patent Act of January 28, 2005 Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hudson PJ, Niall HD, Tregear GW (1984), EP Patent 0112149 B1; EP Patent 0303033 B1 Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Decision of the Examining and Opposition Division of 8 Dec 1994 (1995) OJ EPO 388 Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Godiska R, Gray PW, Schweickart VL (1998) EP Patent 0630405 B1 Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Decision of the Examining and Opposition Division of 20 June 2001 (2002) OJ EPO 293 Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hew CL, Fletcher GL (2001) EP Patent 0578653 B1 Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Smith AG, Mountford PS (1999) EP Patent 0695351 B1 Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zwicker J (2003) Mitt 11:502 Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Smith AG, Mountford PS (2000) US Patent 6146888 Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Krauss J (2005) Mitt 96:490 Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Einfinger A, Klein A (2006) Gen-Patente Pro und Contra, Humboldt Forum Recht, Beitrag 5, http://www.humboldt-forum-recht.de/5-2006/Drucktext.html , last visited: Feb 2007
  50. 50.
    Hartenbach A (2004) Die Bio- und Gentechnologie ist einer der Märkte der Zukunft, German Federal Ministy for Justice, Lecture on 11 March; http://www.bmj.bund.de/enid/Reden/Alfred_Hartenbach_zd.html?druck=1&pmc_id=1341 , last visited: Feb 2007
  51. 51.
    Barton J, Straus J (2000) Nature 406:455 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) of 15 April 1994: Annex 1C of the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization; http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/27-trips_01_e.htm , last visited: Feb 2007
  53. 53.
    Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 of 27 July 1994 on Community plant variety rights, Article 15 (c); Sortenschutzgesetz (German Plant Variety Act) of 1997/2001, § 10a (1) Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Doha WTO Ministerial Declaration (“Doha Declaration”) of 14 November 2001 Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Decisions of the General Council for TRIPS of 27 June 2002 Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Implementation of paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and public health Decision of the General Council of 30 August 2003 (Cancún Ministerial) Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Beyer P, Potrykus I (2000) DE Patent 19909637; PCT Patent WO 00/53768 Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Powell K (2006) Nature 24:294 Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ye X, Al-Babili S, Klöti A, Zhang J, Lucca P, Beyer P, Potrykus I (2000) Science 287:301 CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Paine JA, Shipton CA, Chaggar S, Howells RM, Kennedy MJ, Vernon G, Wright SY, Hinchliffe E, Adams JL, Silverstone AL, Drake R (2005) Nat Biotechnol 23:482 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Al-Babili S, Beyer P (2005) Trends Plant Sci 10:565 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Recital (14), Biotechnology Directive 98/44/EC Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.European Patent AttorneyStuttgartGermany
  2. 2.Fraunhofer Institute for Interfacial Engineering and BiotechnologyStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options