Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Intellectual Property Over Mutant and Gene Edited Plants

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Plant Mutagenesis

  • 43 Accesses

Abstract

Intellectual property rights can cover biological inventions including plants, plant varieties, and plant parts. Defining stable boundaries for plant inventions as legal objects has proven difficult, and these challenges have been exacerbated by the focus on trait breeding in the creation of mutant and gene edited plants. We explore how intellectual property is used to claim ownership of plant inventions, and how this intersects with developments in genetic science. In particular, we analyse how genetic assessment has shaped the UPOV concept of essential determination, the determinative role genetics have played in essential derivation disputes, and proposals to rework essential derivation for the trait breeding era.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Almo s.p.a. v Sardo Piemontese Sementi Soc. Coop. Società Agricola 3519/2015, Turin Trial Court, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agricultural Crop Licensing Platform (2023) Agricultural crop licensing platform. https://aclp.eu/

  • Bernardo R, Kahler AL (2001) North American study on essential derivation in maize: inbreds developed without and with selection from F 2 populations. Theor Appl Genet 102

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjørnstad Å (2016) ‘Do not privatize the giant’s shoulders’: rethinking patents in plant breeding. Trends Biotechnol 34(8):609–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blakeney M (2012) Patenting of plant varieties and plant breeding methods. J Exp Bot 63(3):1069–1074

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bostyn SJ (2021) Towards a fair scope of protection for plant breeders’ rights in an era of new breeding techniques: proposals for a modernization of the essentially derived variety concept. Agronomy 11(8):1511

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cook RC (1932) The first plant patent. J Pat off Soc 14:398

    Google Scholar 

  • Convention on the Grant of European Patents (1973) UNTS volume 1065 (entered into force 7 October 1977) https://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/html/epc/2020/e/ar53.html

  • Correa CM, Correa JI, De Jonge B (2020) The status of patenting plants in the global south. J World Intell Prop 23(1–2):121–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danziger “Dan” Flower Farm v. Astée Flowers B.V. (105.003.932/01), Appeal Court of the Hague, December 29, 2009

    Google Scholar 

  • Danziger “Dan” Flower Farm v. Hananya Azolay and Astée Flowers B.V. (001228/03), District Court of Tel-Aviv-Jaffa (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  • Euroseeds (2023) PINTO Database. https://euroseeds.eu/pinto-patent-information-and-transparency-on-line/

  • Fradgley N, Gardner KA, Cockram J, Elderfield J, Hickey JM, Howell P, Jackson R, Mackay IJ (2019) A large-scale pedigree resource of wheat reveals evidence for adaptation and selection by breeders. PLoS Biol 17(2):e3000071

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey J (1990) The UPOV convention: the scope of protection and its general provisions. In: UPOV seminar on the nature of and rationale for the protection of plant varieties under the UPOV Convention, Budapest, vol 19. https://www.upov.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/upov_pub_697.pdf

  • Heckenberger M, Bohn M, Ziegle JS, Joe LK, Hauser JD, Hutton M, Melchinger AE (2002) Variation of DNA fingerprints among accessions within maize inbred lines and implications for identification of essentially derived varieties. Mol Breed 10:181–191

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Heitz A (1987) The history of plant variety protection. In: The first twenty-five years of the international convention for the protection of new varieties of plant. https://www.upov.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/upov_pub_879.pdf

  • Helfer LR (2007) The demise and rebirth of plant variety protection: a comment on technological change and the design of plant variety protection regimes. Chi Kent L Rev 82:1619

    Google Scholar 

  • International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (“UPOV Convention”) (1991) https://www.upov.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/upov_pub_221.pdf

  • ILP Vegetable (2023) International licencing platform vegetable. https://www.ilp-vegetable.org

  • International Seed Federation (2004) Guidelines for the handling of a dispute on essential derivation in lettuce. https://www.worldseed.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Guidelines_EDV_Lettuce_2004.pdf

  • International Seed Federation (2014) Guidelines for the handling of a dispute on essential derivation in maize lines. https://www.worldseed.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/ISF_Guidelines_Disputes_EDV_Maize_2014.pdf

  • Jamali SH (2020) Trait breeding and plant varietal rights. In: Blakeney M, Siddique K (eds) Local knowledge, intellectual property and agricultural innovation. Springer, Singapore

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamali SH, Cockram J, Hickey LT (2019) Insights into deployment of DNA markers in plant variety protection and registration. Theor Appl Genet 132:1911–1929

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Janis MD, Smith S (2007) Technological change and the design of plant variety protection regimes. Chi Kent L Rev 82:1557

    Google Scholar 

  • Kock MA (2021) Essentially derived varieties in view of new breeding technologies-plant breeders’ rights at a crossroads. GRUR Int 70(1):11–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krieger E, De Keyser E, De Riek J (2020) Do new breeding techniques in ornamentals and fruits lead to essentially derived varieties? Front Plant Sci 10:1612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson C (2016) Plant breeder’s rights and essentially derived varieties: still searching for workable solutions. 32 European Intellectual Property Review 499, Griffith University Law School Research Paper No. 16–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesser W, Mutschler MA (2004) Balancing investment incentives and social benefits when protecting plant varieties: implementing initial variety systems. Crop Sci 44(4):1113–1120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald H (2022) Abstracting plants: legal and scientific judgement in Australia’s plant breeder’s rights system. https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:cf21e18

  • Magali P (2019) Impact of EDV concept on plant breeding: outlook for agricultural crops. In Presentation at UPOV’s seminar on the impact of policy on essentially derived varieties (EDVs) on breeding strategy, October 30, 2019, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.upov.int/edocs/mdocs/upov/en/upov_sem_ge_19/upov_sem_ge_19_ppt_3.pdf

  • Noli E, Teriaca MS, Conti S (2012) Identification of a threshold level to assess essential derivation in durum wheat. Mol Breed 29:687–698

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Plant Breeder’s Rights Act (1994) (Aus) https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/cth/consol_act/pbra1994222/

  • Pottage A, Sherman B (2010) Figures of invention: a history of modern patent law. Oxford University Press, p 183

    Google Scholar 

  • Probstdoder Saatzucht GmbH & Co. KG v Pflanzzucht Oberlimpurg (7 0 442t04), Court of First Instance of Mannheim, Civil Chamber (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen J (1990) The UPOV convention: the concept of variety and technical criteria of distinctness, uniformity and stability. UPOV Publication (697). https://www.upov.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/upov_pub_697.pdf

  • Rousselle Y, Jones E, Charcosset A, Moreau P, Robbins K, Stich B, Knaak C, Flament P, Karaman Z, Martinant JP, Fourneau M (2015) Study on essential derivation in maize: III. Selection and evaluation of a panel of single nucleotide polymorphism loci for use in European and North American germplasm. Crop Sci 55(3):1170–1180

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson J (2006) Essential derivation, law and the limits of science. Law Cont 24(1):34–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman B (2015) What does it mean to invent nature? UC Irvine Law Rev 5(1193):1202–1221

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith JSC (2021) The future of essentially derived variety (EDV) status: predominantly more explanations or essential change. Agronomy 11(6):1261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith JSC, Jones ES, Nelson BK (2014) The use of molecular marker data to assist in the determination of essentially derived varieties. In: Tuberosa R, Graner A, Frison E (eds) Genomics of plant genetic resources. Springer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens H (2015) Networks: representations and tools in postgenomics. In: Postgenomics: perspectives on biology after the genome. Duke University Press, pp 103–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens H (2019) Life out of sequence: a data-driven history of bioinformatics. University of Chicago Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Syngenta Crop Protection AG v Ekologic Seeds DA & Top Seeds Iberica SL 157/2016, Provincial Court of Grenada, Spain (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  • Townsend-Parnell Plant Patent Act of 1930 (“Plant Patent Act”), 1930 (U.S.) https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/35/part-II/chapter-15

  • UPOV (2011) Possible use of molecular markers in the examination of distinctness, uniformity and stability (DUS), UPOV/INF/18/1 https://www.upov.int/edocs/infdocs/en/upov_inf_18.pdf

  • UPOV (2017) Explanatory notes on essentially derived varieties under the 1991 act of the UPOV convention, UPOV/EXN/EDV/2. https://www.upov.int/edocs/expndocs/en/upov_exn_edv.pdf

  • UPOV (2020) Guidance on the use of biochemical and molecular markers in the examination of distinctness, uniformity and stability (DUS), TGP/15/3. https://www.upov.int/edocs/tgpdocs/en/tgp_15.pdf

  • UPOV (2021) Guidelines for DNA-profiling: molecular marker selection and database construction (“BMT Guidelines”), UPOV/INF/17. https://www.upov.int/edocs/infdocs/en/upov_inf_17.pdf

  • UPOV (2022) Explanatory notes on essentially derived varieties under the 1991 act of the UPOV convention (revision) - with comments prior to WG-EDV/4. https://www.upov.int/edocs/mdocs/upov/en/wg_edv_4/upov_exn_edv_3_draft_2_with_comments_prior_to_wg_edv_4.pdf

  • Van Eeuwijk FA, Law JR (2004) Statistical aspects of essential derivation, with illustrations based on lettuce and barley. Euphytica 137:129–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Zanten Plants B.V. v. Hofland B.V. (310918/KG ZA 08-594), District Court of the Hague (2008) (interim injunction proceedings)

    Google Scholar 

  • Vosman B, Visser D, van der Voort JR, Smulders MJ, van Eeuwijk F (2004) The establishment of ‘essential derivation’ among rose varieties, using AFLP. Theor Appl Genet 109:1718–1725

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yang CJ, Russell J, Ramsay L, Thomas W, Powell W, Mackay I (2021) Overcoming barriers to the registration of new plant varieties under the DUS system. Commun Biol 4(1):302

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Law, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia

    Hamish MacDonald

  2. ARC Centre of Excellence for Plant Success in Nature and Agriculture, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia

    Hamish MacDonald

  3. Independent Researcher, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    Seyed Hossein Jamali

Authors
  1. Hamish MacDonald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Seyed Hossein Jamali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hamish MacDonald .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biotechnology, Central University of South Bihar, Bihar, India

    Nitish Kumar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

MacDonald, H., Jamali, S.H. (2024). Intellectual Property Over Mutant and Gene Edited Plants. In: Kumar, N. (eds) Plant Mutagenesis. Sustainable Landscape Planning and Natural Resources Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50729-8_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation