Letter: Biotech patents
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.Sir: A patent for an invention gives the patent holder a monopoly commercially to exploit his invention for a limited period. A patent does not confer ownership of any physical article, whether human tissue or whatever. To obtain a patent the inventor has to disclose the details of how to perform his invention. These details are subsequently published and are available at the end of the patent term for anyone to use.
The rationale for a patent system is, and always has been, that availability of limited-length monopolies encourages not only innovation but also the disclosure of innovation. The deal between state and inventor is that the limited monopoly is given in return for a contribution of some value to the stock of published technical information. That information can be used by anyone without payment of any fee for "experimental purposes relating to the subject matter of the invention" during the term of the patent, and for all purposes including commercial exploitation at the and of the term.
A patent system based on this rationale has existed in this country for more than four centuries. Where would we be now without it? Modern medicine would be very different indeed.
JAMES MARSHALL
London EC4
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments