≡ Menu

Mayo v. Prometheus: Natural Process + Known Elements = Normally No Patent

The US Supreme Court [sic] today held that the correlation between blood test results and patient health is not patentable (see Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.). From the unanimous opinion (by Breyer) (h/t Skip Oliva):

 We find that the process claims at issue here do not satisfy these conditions. In particular, the steps in the claimed processes (apart from the natural laws themselves) involve well-understood, routine, conventional activity previously engaged in by researchers in the field. At the same time, upholding the patents would risk disproportionately tying up the use of the underlying natural laws, inhibiting their use in the making of further discoveries.

Also discussed at Patently-O, in the post Mayo v. Prometheus: Natural Process + Known Elements = Normally No Patent. I continue to be amazed that Objectivists and other pro-patent libertarians think this can even possibly be squared with natural rights.

Share
{ 0 comments… add one }

CC0
To the extent possible under law, Stephan Kinsella has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to C4SIF. This work is published from: United States. In the event the CC0 license is unenforceable a  Creative Commons License Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License is hereby granted.