MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948024621

Gene Patents and the Marginalisation of Ethical Issues.

2019· article· en· W2948024621 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aisling McMahon

Bibliographic record

VenueMURAL - Maynooth University Research Archive Library (National University of Ireland, Maynooth) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatentabilitySupreme courtPatent trollLegislationPolitical scienceLawPatent lawDirectiveHealth lawCommon lawBusinessHealth careIntellectual propertyHealth policy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2013 and 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States (US)1 and Australian High Court,2 respectively, rejected the patentability of isolated genes.3 Subsequently, in March 2016 a case in the Federal Court of Canada involving the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario’s (CHEO) challenge to patents on genes related to Long QT syndrome was settled. The settlement provided a licence to CHEO to test for the syndrome. A primary driver of the litigation in all three jurisdictions, was the broader ethical issues posed by such patents, including, the potential healthcare implications of such patents. The European Union adopted tailored legislation to deal with biotechnology patents in 1998, including gene patents. Again, in Europe, a primary concern underlying the drafting of the Directive was the ethical issues posed by biotechnological patents.4 Nonetheless, despite ethical issues driving challenges to, and debates on changes of patent law in such contexts, in practice ethical issues are given limited consideration within patent law cases in each of these jurisdictions. Using gene patents as a case study, this article argues patent law in these jurisdictions, has failed to engage with the broader ethical issues (including potential healthcare implications) of biotechnological patents in any meaningful way. In effect, a marginalisation of ethical issues is evident within patent law. The only exception to this is Canada, where solutions outside patent law, via licensing, have been devised to deliver access to technologies under patent, focusing on the public health issues at stake. The article argues that unless and until we adopt fundamental institutional change within patent law to address broader ethical issues inherent in the grant of patents, it behoves us to take seriously and devise appropriately, solutions outside patent law to address such ethical issues including potential healthcare implications posed by patent use. For such reasons, at a practical level, the solution offered by tailored licensing approaches in the Canadian context, although not without some potential shortcomings, is arguably a preferable solution in the short term. Such licensing approaches should be taken seriously in other jurisdictions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMURAL - Maynooth University Research Archive Library (National University of Ireland, Maynooth)Same topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207