Re:US appeals court rules in favor of patenting genes
by doktrin on Thursday August 23, 2012 @02:52PM
(#4424176)
This is an interesting point, and this very background may have found its way into the ruling. Specifically, that the judge has a background in chemistry and directly speaks to the difference in perspective between biologists and chemists :
"We recognize that biologists may think of molecules in terms of their uses, but genes are in fact materials having a chemical nature and, as such, are best described in patents by their structures rather than by their functions" [1]
The blogger goes on to state in more plain terms :
"In other words, this ruling affirms that molecular biology is, in fact, chemistry, if you want to look at it that way."
"We recognize that biologists may think of molecules in terms of their uses, but genes are in fact materials having a chemical nature and, as such, are best described in patents by their structures rather than by their functions" [1]
The blogger goes on to state in more plain terms :
"In other words, this ruling affirms that molecular biology is, in fact, chemistry, if you want to look at it that way."
[1]http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2012/08/17/the_myriad_g...