‘Do Not Privatize the Giant's Shoulders’: Rethinking Patents in Plant Breeding

Trends in Biotechnology

Volumn 34, Issue 8, 2016, Pages 609-617

  Bjørnstad, Åsmund ^a  

^a NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES   (Norway)

Author keywords

compulsory licensing; intellectual property rights; patents; plant breeders rights; plant breeding

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURE; BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS; CONSERVATION; CROPS; FOOD SUPPLY; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY; LAWS AND LEGISLATION; SUPPLY CHAINS; TOLL HIGHWAYS;

BIOLOGICAL PROCESS; EUROPEAN GOVERNMENTS; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS; INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS; MATERIAL TRANSFERS; PATENTS; PLANT BREEDERS; PLANT BREEDING;

PATENTS AND INVENTIONS;

CROP; EUROPE; GERMPLASM; LICENSING; NONHUMAN; PATENT; PLANT BREEDING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; UNITED STATES; VARIETAS; AGRICULTURE; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PRIVATE SECTOR;

AGRICULTURE; CROPS, AGRICULTURAL; EUROPE; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; OWNERSHIP; PATENTS AS TOPIC; PLANT BREEDING; PRIVATE SECTOR; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84962570994     PISSN: 01677799     EISSN: 18793096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2016.02.007     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. 1 Henry, C., Stiglitz, J.E., Intellectual property, dissemination of innovation and sustainable development. Glob. Policy 1 (2010), 237–251.
2. 2 Reichman, J.H., Of green tulips and legal kudzu: repackaging rights in subpatentable innovation. Vand. L. Rev., 53, 2000, 1743.
3. 3 Gouache, J.C., et al. Amélioration des plantes: il aut fair évoluer les outils de propriété industrielle. Pour une prise en compte des évolutions scientifiques et techniques des ces dernières décennies. Paysans Soc. 354 (2015), 9–16 (in French).
4. 4 Lillemo, M., et al. Increasing impact of plant breeding on barley yields in central Norway from 1946 to 2008. Plant Breed. 128 (2010), 1–7.
5. 5 Bonny, S., Taking stock of the genetically modified seed sector worldwide: market, stakeholders, and prices. Food Sec. 6 (2014), 525–540.
6. 6 Howard, P.H., Intellectual property and consolidation in the seed industry. Crop Sci. 55 (2015), 2489–2495.
7. 7 Louwaars, N., et al. Breeding Business. The Future of Plant Breeding in the Light of Developments in Patent Rights and Plant Breeder's Rights. 2009, Netherlands Ministry of Agriculture, Nature, and Food Quality.
8. 8 Kapur, A., IPR laws to protect innovation not restrict crop breeding – a rational approach. J. Intell. Prop. Rights 16 (2011), 117–123.
9. 9 Ghijsen, H., Intellectual property rights and access rules for germplasm: benefit or straitjacket?. Euphytica 170 (2009), 229–234.
10. 10 Luby, C.H., et al. Enhancing freedom to operate for plant breeders and farmers through open source plant breeding. Crop Sci. 55 (2015), 2481–2488.
11. 11 Fowler, C., The Plant Patent Act of 1930: a sociological history of its creation. J. Pat. Trademark Off. Soc. 82 (2000), 621–644.
12. 12 European Parliament and Council. Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the Legal Protection of Biotechnological Inventions. 1998, European Parliament and Council.
13. 13 Enlarged Board of Appeal. Method for Selective Increase of the Anticarcinogenic Glucosinolates in Brassica Species. 2015, Enlarged Board of Appeal.
14. 14 Zimmer, F.J., Grammel, M., Plant Patents in Europe. Biotechnol. Law Rep. 34 (2015), 121–131.
15. 15 Prifti, V., The Breeder's Exception to Patent Rights. Analysis of Compliance with Article 30 of the TRIPS Agreement. 2015, Springer.
16. 16 Bjørnstad, Å., et al. “Facilitated access” to plant genetic resources: does it work?. Genet. Resourc. Crop Evol. 60 (2013), 1959–1965.
17. 17 Galushko, V., et al. Operating in an intellectual property world: knowledge sharing among plant breeders in Canada. Can. J. Agr. Econ. 60 (2012), 295–316.
18. 18 Jondle, R.J., et al. Current legal issues in intellectual property rights and protection for crop plants. Crop Sci. 55 (2015), 2496–2503.
19. 19 Heller, M.A., Eisenberg, R.S., Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science 280 (1998), 698–701.
20. 20 van den Bosch, F. and Boon, M.P. Seminis Vegetable Seeds, Inc. Broccoli type adapted for ease of harvest, US8030549.
21. 21 Smith, S., Intellectual property protection for plant varieties in the 21st century. Crop Sci. 48 (2008), 1277–1290.
22. 22 Kock, M.A., Plant breeding innovations: free access, but not access for free. A new approach to facilitating FRAND licenses for plant-related patents. Biosci. Law Rev. 14 (2015), 123–129.
23. 23 Lusser, M., et al. Deployment of new biotechnologies in plant breeding. Nat. Biotechnol. 30 (2012), 231–239.
24. 24 Smolders, W., et al. Plant genetic resources for food and agriculture: facilitated access or utility patents on plant varieties. IP Strategy Today 13 (2005), 1–17.
25. 25 McDougall, P., The Cost and Time Involved in the Discovery, Development and Authorisation of a New Plant Biotechnology Derived Trait. 2011, Crop Life International.
26. 26 Jefferson, D.J., et al. The emergence of agbiogenerics. Nat. Biotechnol. 33 (2015), 819–823.
27. 27 Pila, J., Article 53(b) EPC: a challenge to the Novartis theory of European patent history. Mod. Law Rev. 72 (2009), 412–462.
28. 28 Prifti, V., The role of public interest in plant-related patents: a European perspective. Schleissing, S., et al. (eds.) Biopatente: Saatgut als Ware und als öffentliches Gut, 2015, Social Science Research Network http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2542640.
29. 29 Hermitte, M-H. (2016) L'emprise des droits intellectuels sur le monde vivant. Editions Quæ, Versailles ISSN: 1269-8490 ISBN: 978-2-7592-2457-9.