Ananda Chakrabarty wins a patent: Biotechnology, law, and society, 1972-1980

Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 1994, Pages 111-135

  Kevles, Daniel J ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOCHEMISTRY; BIOTECHNOLOGY; HISTORY; HISTORY OF MEDICINE; HUMAN; JURISPRUDENCE; MICROBIOLOGY; UNITED STATES;

BIOCHEMISTRY; BIOTECHNOLOGY; HISTORY OF MEDICINE, 20TH CENT.; HUMAN; JURISPRUDENCE; MICROBIOLOGY; PATENTS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0028685917     PISSN: 08909997     EISSN: 15338355     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/27757736     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Historical statistics of the United States, Colonial times to 1970 (2 vols., Washington, D.C., 1975), 2, 957-59
2. Brief for the petitioner [Jan 1980], 2—3
3. Frank P. Darr, “Expanding patent coverage: Policy implications of Diamond V. Chakrabarty,” Ohio State law journal, 42 (1981), 1071.
4. H. Thorne, “Relation of patent law to natural products,” Patent Office Society, Journal, 6 (1923), 23-28
5. Stephen A. Bent et al., Intellectual property rights in biotechnology worldwide (New York, 1987).
6. F.K. Beier, R.S. Crespi, and J. Straus, Biotechnology and patent protection: An international review (Paris, 1985).
7. Glenn Bugos and Daniel J. Kevles, “Plants as intellectual property: American law, policy, and practice in world context,” Osiris, 7 (1992), 119-48.
8. Jack R. Kloppenburg, Jr., First the seed: The political economy of plant biotechnology, 1492-2000 (New York, 1988)
9. Calestous Juma, The gene hunters: Biotechnology and the scramble for seeds (Princeton, 1989).
10. Charles Weiner, “Professors and patents: A continuing controversy,” Technology review, 89 (Feb/Mar 1986), 33-43
11. Patenting and academic research: Historical case studies,” Science, technology, and human values, 12 (1987), 50-56
12. William H. Lesser, ed., Animal patents: The legal, economic, and social issues (New York, 1989)
13. Sheldon Krimsky, Biotechnics and society: The rise of industrial genetics (New York, 1991).
14. People, 14 (14 Jul 1980), 38
15. Graham S. Wilson and A. Ashley Miles, Topley and Wilson’s principles of bacteriology and immunity (5th ed., 2 vols., London, 1964), 1, 636-38
16. Daniel I.E. Wang, “Proteins from petroleum,” Chemical engineering, 75 (26 Aug 1968), 99-108.
17. Business week (8 Feb 1969), 60
18. Time (7 Apr 1967), 28
19. Science news, 95 (22 Feb 1969), 183-184.
20. Malossi, “Reply brief,” 10 Oct 1974
21. “Opinion and decision of Board of Appeals,” 20 May 1976
22. “Letter of examiner,” 6 Feb 1975
23. Saliwanchik, “Brief,” 18 Mar 1975
24. Opinion and decision of Board of Appeals, June 22, 1976,” in Transcript of record... Bergy (ref. 24), 34, 54, 62-63
25. In the matter of the application ofMalcolm E. Bergy et al., patent appeal no. 76712, U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, 563 F. 2d, 1032-1035 (1977)
26. Steven S.Hall, Invisible frontiers: The race to synthesize a human gene (New York, 1987), 87-88
27. Matt Clark & Joseph Contreras, “Making insulin,” Newsweek, 92 (18 Sep 1978), 93.
28. Martin Kenney, Biotechnology: The university-industrial complex (New Haven, 1986), 44-45, 56, 61-67, 73, 78-80, 140, 191
29. Nicholas Wade, “Recombinant DNA: Warming up for the big payoff,” Science, 206 (9 Nov 1979), 663, 665
30. The Wall Street Journal, 10 May 1979.
31. Susan Wright, “Recombinant DNA technology and its social transformation, 1972-1982,” Osiris, 2 (1986), 303-60
32. Kenney, Biotechnology, 94-96
33. The Wall Street Journal (7 Sep 1978), 17
34. The Wall Street Journal, 15 Jan 1980, 4
35. Supreme Court hears argument on patenting life forms,” Science, 208 (4 Apr 1980), 31.
36. Parker V. Bergy et al., and Parker V. Chakrabarty, Brief on behalf of the People s Business Commission, amicus curiae, Dec 1979, 17-18
37. Diamond V. Chakrabarty, Brief on behalf of the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association, amicus curiae, Jan 1980, 13, 26-28, 48
38. Brief on behalf of Genentech, Inc., amicus curiae, Jan 1980, 13, 17-18.
39. Diamond V. Chakrabarty, Brief on behalf of the American Patent Law Association, Inc., amicus curiae, Jan 1980, 22
40. Diamond V. Chakrabarty, Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association (ref. 48), 15-16
41. The United States law week, 48 (25 Mar 1980), 3609-3610
42. The New York Times, 18 June 1980, A30
43. “Patenting life: split perspectives,” Science news, 118 (2 Aug 1980), 71.
44. Test-Tube life,” Time, 115 (30 June 1980), 52-53
45. Peter Gwynne, “Court decision spurs genetic research,” Industrial research and development, 22 (Aug 1980), 46
46. The right to patent life,” Newsweek, 95 (30 June 1980), 74
47. Los Angeles Times (17 June 1980), 11
48. C. Larry O’Rourke, “The Chakrabarty decision,” Environment, 22 (Jul/Aug 1980), 5.
49. Ex Parte Hibberd, et al. (1985) 227 United States patent quarterly, 443
50. Ex Parte Allen, United States patent quarterly (1987), 1425.