Conclusion and Suggestions



The conjunction of biotechnology and intellectual property rights (IPR) has serious implications for law and society. Intellectual property laws, which were framed in the industrial age, have proved to be inefficient in the present information age. Existing patent laws are confronted with new genetic inventions, which differ markedly from mechanical and chemical inventions that have been the traditional subject matters of patents. Modern biotechnology inventions, particularly genetic inventions, have become more valuable as an embodiment of information as compared to their physical attributes. The advent of bioinformatics and genetic databases demands a different patent approach, much in tune with the present information age. Although, it is not possible to create new IPR every time when a new technology emerges, however, fitting all sorts of inventions in a single set of law is also problematic.


Supra Note Intellectual Property Right Patent System Intellectual Property Protection Genetic Invention 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Doha WTO Ministerial 2001: Ministerial Declaration, WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1, Nov. 20, 2001, adopted Nov. 14, 2001Google Scholar
  2. Eisenberg Rebecca S. (2000) Re-Examining the Role of Patents in Appropriating the Value of DNA Sequences. Emory Law Journal 49: 783Google Scholar
  3. Eisenberg Rebecca (2006) The story of Diamond v. Chakrabarty: technological change and the subject matter boundaries of the patent system. In: Jane Ginsberg and Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss (eds.) Intellectual Property Stories. Foundation Press, New York, p. 349Google Scholar
  4. Sumikura Koichi (2009) Intellectual property rights policy for gene-related inventions-toward optimum balance between public and private ownership. In: David Castle (Ed.) The Role of Intellectual Property Rights in Biotechnology Innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham U.K./Massachusetts U.S.A., p. 88Google Scholar
  5. Walsh John P, Arora Ashish, Cohen Wesley M. (2003) Working through the patent problem. Science 299: 14CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Amity Law SchoolNoidaIndia

Personalised recommendations