Abstract
Human medical research is often a part of a long and costly process of developing and marketing new kinds of medicines and medical products; this process cannot usually take place without private investments. One of the ways to encourage the private sector to invest in this area and to allow for a return on investments, is to allow investors to patent the outcomes of such research. This chapter analyses some crucial rules of European patent law which pertain to the ethical aspect of human medical research, i.e. in terms of their construction, practical applicability and efficiency. As it turns out, the said provisions leave much to be desired, despite the noble intentions of their introduction.
Keywords
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
See further Ilja Pavone’s Chap. 7 in this volume.
- 3.
European Patent Office—an office whose main competence is granting patents according to the EPC.
- 4.
The “fruits of the poisonous tree” approach towards patentability of certain inventions has recently been strengthened by the opinion of Attorney General Yves Bot, before the EU Court of Justice and the judgement of the Court in the case C-34/10. In the opinion, we read inter alia that “An invention must be excluded from patentability where the application of the technical process for which the patent is filed necessitates the prior destruction of human embryos or their use as base material, even if the description of that process does not contain any reference to the use of human embryos.” On the other hand, such approach has already been criticised by the doctrine as going too far (see, for example, Grund and Farmer 2011).
- 5.
Such exclusion was recently mentioned also in an EU Tribunal judgment, in case C-34/10. This judgment could not be thoroughly commented in this paper due to the date, at which it was passed.
References
Bostyn SJR (2003) The prodigal son: the relationship between patent law and healthcare. Med Law Rev 11:67–120
Crespi RS (2000) An analysis of moral issues affecting patenting inventions in the life sciences; a European perspective. Sci Eng Ethics 6:157–180
Du Vall M (2008) Prawo patentowe. Wolters-Kluwer Polska, Warsaw
Emanuel E, Wendler D, Grady C (2000) What makes clinical research ethical? JAMA 283(20):2701–2711
Fukuyama F (2002) Our posthuman future: consequences of the biotechnology revolution, Farrar Straus & Giroux, New York
Green RM (2002) Determining moral status. Am J Bioethics 2(1):20–30
Grund M, Farmer SJ (2011) The EU stem cell debate: can patenting stem cell innovations be done morally? Bio Sci Law Rev 11(6):187–193
Hanson MJ (1999) Biotechnology and commodification within healthcare. J Med Philos 24(3):267–287
Häyry M, Häyry H (1997) Genetic engineering. In: Callahan D, Singer P, Chadwick R (eds) Encyclopedia of applied ethics. Academic Press, London, pp 407–417
HFEA (2007) Hybrids and chimeras. A report on the findings of the consultation. Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority, London
Hoedemaekers R (2001) Commercialization, patents and moral assessment of biotechnology products. J Med Philos 26(3):273–284
Holm S (1998) Ethics of embryology. In: Chadwick RF (ed) The concise encyclopedia of the ethics of new technologies. Academic Press, San Diego
Isasi RM, Knoppers BM (2006) Beyond the permissibility of embryonic and stem cell research: substantive requirements and procedural safeguards. Hum Reprod 21(10):2474–2481
Knowles LP (1999) Property, progeny, and patents. Hastings Center Rep 29(2):38–40
Moufang R (1994) Patenting of human genes, cells and parts of the body?—the ethical dimensions of patent law. IIC 25(4):487–515
Papaioannou T (2008) Human gene patents and the question of liberal morality. Genomics, Soc Policy 4(3):64–83
Rabin S (2006) The human use of humanoid beings: chimeras and patent law. Nat Biotechnol 24(5):517–519
Resnik D (2002) Commercialization of human stem cell lines: ethical and policy issues. Health Care Anal 101:127–154
Takala T, Häyry M (2007) Benefiting from past wrongdoing, human embryonic stem cell lines and the fragility of the german legal position. Bioethics 21(3):150–159
Warren MA (1973) On the moral and legal status of abortion. Monist 57:43–61
Warren-Jones A (2007) Vital parameters for patent morality—a question of form. J Intel Prop Law Prac 2(12):832–846
Żakowska-Henzler H (2006) Wynalazek biotechnologiczny—przedmiot patentu. Scholar, Warsaw
International Documents
Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions. OJ L 213, 30.7.1998, pp 13–21
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, Annex 1C of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, signed in Marrakesh, Morocco on 15 April 1994
Convention on the Grant of European Patents (European Patent Convention), of 5 October 1973, text as amended by the act revising Article 63 EPC of 17 December 1991 and by decisions of the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation of 21 December 1978, 13 December 1994, 20 October 1995, 5 December 1996, 10 December 1998 and 27 October 2005, and comprising the provisionally applicable provisions of the act revising the EPC of 29 November 2000
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, adopted in Oviedo on 4 April 1997. CETS No 164
WMA Declaration of Helsinki—Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects, version of 2008
The Belmont Report, Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research, The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, 1979
Nuremberg Code, http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/nuremberg.html
Decisions of the European Patent Office and other documents
Decision of the Technical Board of Appeals No T 356/93
Decision of the Technical Board of Appeals No T 315/03
Decision of the Enlarged Board of Appeals No G 2/06
Opinion of Advocate General Bot, Case C 34/10, Court of Justice of the European Union
Judgment Of The Court (Grand Chamber) of 18 October 2011, In Case C–34/10
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Basel AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zimny, T. (2012). Research Involving Human Subjects and Human Biological Material from a European Patent Law Perspective. Autonomy, Commodification, Patentability. In: Schildmann, J., Sandow, V., Rauprich, O., Vollmann, J. (eds) Human Medical Research. Springer, Basel. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-0390-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-0390-8_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Basel
Print ISBN: 978-3-0348-0389-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-0348-0390-8
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)