LETTER: A patent need for discussion
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Mr David Shapiro
Sir: The European Patent Office (EPO), through its public relations director (letter, 21 September), confirms the complaint made by your science editor, Tom Wilkie, and by me, that its consultation document appears to have been circulated only among those professionally concerned with patents. So what if it went to "other international organisations, professional associations ... that specialise in intellectual property rights (my emphasis)"? This means that, on matters of general public interest, it went only to those like your correspondent Terry Stancliffe (letter, 21 September), who writes as a chartered patent agent. For only such people can distinguish as new inventions, or so-called pharmaceuticals, what to others are sophisticated ways of manipulating patent offices into patenting human genome sequences, which are really discoveries.
What is required is public discussion of the justification of the patenting, for example, of the breast cancer gene BRCA 1. That patent was granted by the US Patent Office, but the EPO might usefully discuss the points of principle involved.
The EPO, it seems, is at pains to avoid such a public discussion.
Yours faithfully,
David Shapiro
Executive Secretary
Nuffield Council on Bioethics
London, WC1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments