May, Christopher --- "On the Border: Biotechnology, the Scope of Intellectual Property and the Dissemination of Scientific Benefits" [2009] ELECD 493; in Castle, David (ed), "The Role of Intellectual Property Rights in Biotechnology Innovation" (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2009)

Book Title: The Role of Intellectual Property Rights in Biotechnology Innovation

Editor(s): Castle, David

Publisher: Edward Elgar Publishing

ISBN (hard cover): 9781847209801

Section: Chapter 11

Section Title: On the Border: Biotechnology, the Scope of Intellectual Property and the Dissemination of Scientific Benefits

Author(s): May, Christopher

Number of pages: 22

Extract:

11. On the border: biotechnology,
the scope of intellectual property
and the dissemination of scientific
benefits
Christopher May

Many commentators want to discuss the intersection of biotechnology
and patents (or intellectual property more generally) as if this was a novel
problem, requiring new solutions, and a new politics. However, as the
politics of intellectual property has always been about making property
from new techniques and knowledge (intellectual property almost by
definition is the commodification1 of innovation), this claim for historical
novelty is far from conclusive. In this chapter I will suggest there are two
responses that can be made to the argument that biotechnology requires
a reformation of the patent system; first we can examine the possibilities
for incremental `problem solving' ­ reworking and renegotiating how the
system deals with biotechnology `innovations'; second, it can be taken
as a question regarding the general scope of intellectual property itself.
The latter argument suggests that this is a category, or border, problem;
biotechnology is erroneously included in the system of patents, and many
of the political, ethical and practical issues might be solved by establish-
ing that biotechnological `products' and techniques should not be subject
to patent at all. Thus, rather than a question about how patents might
better support innovation, another way through the current disputes over
biotech patents would be firmly to (re)establish patent criteria to exclude
biotechnological tools and bio-medical materials/products altogether.
Certainly, in many ways biotechnology is not a revolutionary technol-
ogy; rather, it builds on ...