Gene Patenting: The Controversial Battle Over Who Owns Your DNA

Home / Blog / Biotechnology / Gene Patenting: The Controversial Battle Over Who Owns Your DNA


In the rapidly evolving landscape of biotechnology, gene patenting has emerged as a critical and often contentious issue. 

Gene patents grant the holder exclusive rights to specific sequences of DNA, enabling them to control the use, production, and sale of these genetic materials.

This practice has significant implications for the development of medical treatments, diagnostic tests, and various biotechnological innovations. 

The origins of gene patenting trace back to the early days of genetic engineering when scientists first began isolating and manipulating genes.

Over the decades, the legal frameworks surrounding gene patents have evolved, reflecting changes in both scientific understanding and societal values.

The concept of gene patenting is rooted in the broader principles of intellectual property law, which aims to incentivize innovation by granting inventors exclusive rights to their discoveries.

However, the application of these principles to genetic material raises unique ethical and practical questions. 

Can one truly “own” a part of the human genome? How do patents on genes impact research and access to healthcare? These questions have fueled ongoing debates among scientists, ethicists, legal experts, and the public.

Table of Contents

I. Background on Gene Patenting 

1. Legal Framework and History

Brief History of Patent Law as It Applies to Genetic Material

Patent law is designed to protect inventions and innovations by granting inventors exclusive rights to their creations for a limited period. 

The application of patent law to genetic material has a complex history. The foundational principle that natural phenomena cannot be patented was challenged with the advent of genetic engineering.

Key Milestones in Gene Patenting Legislation

Diamond v. Chakrabarty (1980)

  • This landmark U.S. Supreme Court case set the precedent for patenting living organisms.

The court ruled in favor of Ananda Chakrabarty, a microbiologist who developed a genetically modified bacterium capable of breaking down crude oil, thus opening the door for patenting genetically engineered life forms.

Human Genome Project (1990-2003)

  • Although not directly a legal case, the Human Genome Project (HGP) played a significant role in the context of gene patenting.

The project’s public nature and its emphasis on making genetic data freely available contrasted with the commercial interests that sought to patent genes.

Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics (2013)

  • In another pivotal U.S. Supreme Court case, the court ruled that naturally occurring DNA sequences cannot be patented, although cDNA (complementary DNA), which is synthetically created, can be.

This decision had a profound impact on the biotech industry, particularly on companies like Myriad Genetics that held patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes.

2. Types of Genetic Material Patents

Isolated Gene Sequences

  • Patents on isolated gene sequences involve claims to specific DNA sequences that have been extracted from their natural environment and identified for their utility.

For example, Myriad Genetics’ patents on BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene sequences were significant because they related to tests predicting the risk of breast and ovarian cancer.

Synthetic Genes

  • Synthetic genes, or cDNA, are created in the laboratory using reverse transcription of mRNA. These synthetic versions of naturally occurring genes can be patented.

The ability to patent cDNA was affirmed in the Myriad Genetics case, distinguishing it from naturally occurring DNA.

Gene Therapies and CRISPR Technology

  • Innovations in gene therapies and gene-editing technologies, such as CRISPR-Cas9, have introduced new frontiers in gene patenting.

The CRISPR technology, for example, involves editing the genome with unprecedented precision, leading to patent disputes over the ownership of the technology’s various applications.

II. Ethical Considerations 

1. Moral and Philosophical Perspectives

The Natural Versus Artificial Debate

One of the central ethical debates in gene patenting revolves around the distinction between natural and artificial. 

Opponents argue that genes, being fundamental components of life, should not be subject to ownership. 

Proponents contend that the process of isolating and identifying specific functions of genes constitutes a significant human innovation deserving of patent protection.

Arguments For and Against the Commodification of Life

  • For: Patents incentivize innovation, investment, and development in biotechnology, leading to advancements in medicine and agriculture.
  • Against: Patenting life forms can be seen as morally objectionable and could lead to monopolies that restrict access to essential genetic tests and treatments.

Perspectives from Various Ethical Frameworks

  • Utilitarianism: Evaluates gene patenting based on the greatest good for the greatest number, weighing the benefits of innovation against potential harms like restricted access and high costs.
  • Deontology: Focuses on the moral principles involved, such as whether it is inherently wrong to claim ownership over parts of the human genome.
  • Bioethics: Considers the implications for human dignity, autonomy, and the rights of individuals versus the interests of corporations.

2. Impact on Research and Innovation

Encouragement of Innovation and Investment

Patents can provide the financial incentives necessary for companies to invest in expensive and risky biotech research, potentially leading to groundbreaking treatments and technologies.

Potential Hindrance of Scientific Research and Open Access to Genetic Information

Gene patents can create barriers to research by restricting the use of patented genes without permission, leading to concerns about “patent thickets” that complicate and slow down scientific progress.

The Balance Between Commercial Interests and Public Good

Finding a balance between protecting commercial interests and ensuring public access to genetic information is crucial. Policies that promote open access while protecting genuine innovations can help achieve this balance.

3. Access and Equity Issues

Accessibility of Patented Genetic Tests and Therapies

Patented genetic tests and therapies can be prohibitively expensive, limiting access for patients who need them the most. This issue is exemplified by the high costs of Myriad Genetics’ BRCA tests before the Supreme Court ruling.

The Impact on Healthcare Disparities and Global Equity

Gene patents can exacerbate healthcare disparities, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where access to advanced medical technologies is already limited. 

Ensuring equitable access to genetic advancements is a significant ethical concern.

Case Studies: Myriad Genetics’ BRCA1 and BRCA2 Patents

  • Background: Myriad Genetics patented the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, which are linked to breast and ovarian cancer risk, and developed tests for these genes.
  • Controversies: The patents led to high costs for testing and restricted research by other institutions.

The Supreme Court’s decision to invalidate the patents on natural DNA sequences aimed to improve access and encourage research.

4. Patient Rights and Informed Consent

Ethical Implications for Patients Whose Genes Are Patented

Patients may be unaware that their genetic material has been patented, raising concerns about consent and autonomy.

The ownership of genetic information by corporations can lead to ethical dilemmas regarding patient rights.

Issues of Consent and Ownership of Genetic Material

The process of obtaining informed consent for the use of genetic material in research and patenting is complex.

Patients need to understand how their genetic information will be used and the potential implications of patenting.

The Role of Biobanks and Genetic Data Privacy

Biobanks, which store genetic material for research, must navigate ethical issues related to privacy, consent, and ownership.

Ensuring that donors are fully informed and that their data is protected is essential.

III. Controversies and Debates 

1. High-Profile Legal Cases

Detailed Analysis of Key Court Rulings

Diamond v. Chakrabarty (1980)

  • Case Summary: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ananda Chakrabarty, who developed a genetically modified bacterium capable of breaking down crude oil.

The decision marked the first time a living organism was deemed patentable, based on the premise that the bacterium was a product of human ingenuity and research.

It underscored the notion that human-made innovations, even if biological, could be protected under patent law.

Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics (2013)

  • Case Summary: The Supreme Court ruled that naturally occurring DNA sequences cannot be patented, while synthetic cDNA could be.

Myriad Genetics had patented the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, which are linked to an increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer, as well as the diagnostic tests for these genes.

  • Implications: This decision had a profound impact on the biotechnology industry, invalidating patents on naturally occurring genetic sequences and thus promoting wider access to genetic testing.

It also highlighted the distinction between naturally occurring substances and human-made inventions in patent law.

2. Corporate and Public Sector Dynamics

Role of Biotechnology Companies in Gene Patenting

  • Biotechnology companies have been at the forefront of gene patenting, driving innovation and commercializing genetic technologies.

However, their practices have often sparked controversy regarding monopolistic tendencies and high costs of patented tests and therapies.

Public Sector and Academic Institutions’ Stance on Gene Patents

  • Public sector and academic institutions typically advocate for open access to genetic information to promote research and innovation.

The Human Genome Project, for instance, made its data freely available, contrasting with the proprietary approaches of many biotech companies.

Case Study: The Human Genome Project

  • Background: The Human Genome Project (HGP) was an international research initiative that aimed to map the entire human genome.

It operated on the principle of open access, making its data available to researchers worldwide.

  • Impact: The HGP’s open-access model significantly advanced genetic research and set a precedent for sharing scientific data.

It also highlighted the ethical and practical benefits of open access compared to proprietary gene patenting.

3. Global Perspectives and International Differences

Comparison of Gene Patenting Laws in Different Countries

  • United States: The U.S. has a well-established framework for gene patenting, influenced by key legal decisions like Diamond v. Chakrabarty and Myriad Genetics.
  • European Union: The EU has a more restrictive approach, with the European Patent Office (EPO) allowing patents on biotechnological inventions but excluding patents on human genes if they are merely discoveries.
  • India: Indian patent law is more restrictive, with specific provisions that prohibit the patenting of living organisms, including genetic sequences.

Impact of International Agreements (e.g., TRIPS Agreement)

  • The TRIPS Agreement (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) sets minimum standards for intellectual property regulation globally.

It requires member countries to provide patent protection for inventions, including biotechnological innovations, but allows some flexibility in implementation.

Ethical Considerations in Different Cultural Contexts

  • Ethical perspectives on gene patenting vary widely across cultures. Some societies emphasize communal access to genetic resources, while others prioritize individual ownership and commercialization.

Understanding these cultural differences is crucial for developing fair and effective global patent policies.

IV. Real-World Examples and Case Studies 

1. Myriad Genetics and the BRCA Patents

Overview of the Patents and Their Significance

  • Myriad Genetics patented the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, as well as diagnostic tests to identify mutations in these genes that increase the risk of breast and ovarian cancer.

These patents were significant because they covered not only the isolated DNA sequences but also the methods for testing them.

Controversies and Legal Battles

  • Myriad’s patents sparked widespread controversy and legal challenges, culminating in the Supreme Court ruling that invalidated patents on naturally occurring DNA sequences.

Critics argued that the patents restricted access to crucial genetic tests and hindered research by other institutions.

Impact on Patients, Researchers, and the Biotechnology Industry

  • The invalidation of Myriad’s patents led to reduced costs and increased access to BRCA testing, benefiting patients.

It also opened up the field for more research and competition, fostering innovation in genetic testing and therapies.

2. CRISPR-Cas9 Technology

Patenting Disputes and Ethical Implications

  • CRISPR-Cas9, a revolutionary gene-editing technology, has been at the center of intense patent disputes, particularly between the Broad Institute and the University of California.

The ethical implications of CRISPR involve concerns about off-target effects, germline editing, and the potential for “designer babies.”

Contributions of Key Players

  • The Broad Institute and the University of California have been key players in developing and patenting CRISPR technology.

Their contributions have advanced the field of gene editing, but their patent disputes highlight the challenges of attributing ownership in collaborative scientific endeavors.

Potential Benefits and Ethical Concerns Surrounding Gene Editing

  • CRISPR holds immense potential for treating genetic diseases, improving crop yields, and advancing scientific research.

However, ethical concerns include the potential for unintended consequences, the ethics of editing human embryos, and issues of accessibility and equity.

3. Agricultural Biotechnology and GMOs

Patenting of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)

  • The patenting of GMOs has been a contentious issue, with companies like Monsanto holding patents on genetically modified crops.

These patents allow companies to control the use of their GMOs, impacting farmers and food security.

Ethical Issues in Food Security and Environmental Impact

  • Patents on GMOs raise ethical questions about food sovereignty, the impact on small farmers, and the environmental effects of genetically modified crops.

Critics argue that GMOs and their patents can lead to monocultures and reduce biodiversity.

Case Study: Monsanto and Its Patented Seeds

  • Monsanto, now part of Bayer, has been a major player in the agricultural biotechnology industry, holding patents on genetically modified seeds like Roundup Ready soybeans.

These patents have led to legal battles with farmers over seed saving and replanting, highlighting the ethical and practical implications of controlling genetic resources in agriculture.

V. Current Trends and Future Directions 

1. Evolving Legal Landscape

Recent Developments in Gene Patenting Laws and Regulations

  • Post-Myriad Adjustments: Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Myriad Genetics, patent offices and courts around the world have been revisiting their guidelines and criteria for gene patenting.

This includes clarifying what constitutes a naturally occurring substance versus a human-made invention.

  • European Patent Office (EPO) Guidelines: The EPO has issued updated guidelines to reflect recent rulings and ensure consistency in patent examination processes.

These guidelines emphasize the exclusion of naturally occurring genes from patentability while allowing synthetic biology innovations to be patented.

  • CRISPR Legal Battles: The ongoing disputes over CRISPR patents highlight the evolving nature of gene patenting, particularly as new technologies emerge.

The legal outcomes of these cases will shape future patent strategies and regulatory frameworks.

Predictions for Future Legal and Ethical Challenges

  • Gene Editing and Personalized Medicine: As gene editing technologies like CRISPR become more widespread, legal systems will need to address new ethical and regulatory challenges.

These include the potential for gene editing in embryos, which raises significant ethical concerns.

  • Global Harmonization of Patent Laws: There will be increasing pressure to harmonize patent laws internationally to facilitate global cooperation in genetic research and commercialization.

Balancing national interests with global standards will be a complex task.

  • Data Privacy and Biobanking: The legal landscape will need to evolve to address the privacy and consent issues associated with biobanking and the use of genetic data.

This will involve developing robust frameworks to protect individuals’ genetic information while promoting research.

2. Technological Advancements and Ethical Implications

Advances in Gene Editing, Synthetic Biology, and Personalized Medicine

  • CRISPR and Beyond: The development of CRISPR and other gene editing tools has revolutionized biotechnology.

Future advancements will likely include more precise editing techniques, expanded applications in agriculture and medicine, and potential cures for genetic diseases.

  • Synthetic Biology: The field of synthetic biology, which involves designing and constructing new biological parts and systems, is rapidly advancing.

This includes the creation of entirely synthetic organisms, raising new ethical and regulatory questions.

  • Personalized Medicine: The rise of personalized medicine, which tailors treatments to individual genetic profiles, represents a significant shift in healthcare.

This approach relies heavily on genetic data and will require careful consideration of privacy, consent, and equity issues.

Emerging Ethical Dilemmas and Potential Resolutions

  • Gene Editing in Humans: The potential for germline editing, where changes are made to human embryos that can be passed on to future generations, poses profound ethical questions.

There is a need for global consensus and stringent regulations to ensure responsible use.

  • Access and Equity: Ensuring equitable access to the benefits of genetic technologies is a major ethical challenge.

Policies must be developed to prevent disparities in access to genetic therapies and to ensure that advancements benefit all segments of society.

  • Intellectual Property and Open Science: Balancing intellectual property rights with the principles of open science will be crucial.

Encouraging collaboration and data sharing while protecting innovators’ rights requires innovative legal and policy solutions.

3. Public Perception and Societal Impact

Changing Public Attitudes Towards Gene Patenting

  • Increased Awareness and Engagement: Public awareness of gene patenting issues has grown, particularly through high-profile cases like Myriad Genetics and CRISPR disputes.

This increased engagement can drive more informed and balanced public discourse.

  • Educational Initiatives: Efforts to educate the public about the complexities and implications of gene patenting are essential.

This includes understanding the science behind genetic technologies and the ethical and legal frameworks governing them.

Role of Public Engagement and Education in Shaping Ethical Practices

  • Involving Stakeholders: Engaging a broad range of stakeholders, including scientists, ethicists, policymakers, and the public, is crucial for developing ethical guidelines and policies.

Public forums, advisory panels, and collaborative platforms can facilitate this engagement.

  • Transparent Communication: Transparency in the patenting process and clear communication about the benefits and risks of genetic technologies can help build public trust and support.

This involves demystifying scientific advancements and addressing ethical concerns openly.

VI. Conclusion

The ethical considerations and controversies surrounding gene patenting are multifaceted, involving legal, moral, and practical dimensions. 

Key court rulings have shaped the landscape, and ongoing debates highlight the need for balanced approaches to innovation and access.

As biotechnology continues to advance, the challenges of gene patenting will evolve. It is essential to foster a dialogue that integrates scientific innovation with ethical responsibility and public interest.

Policymakers, scientists, and the public must work together to create frameworks that encourage innovation while ensuring ethical practices and equitable access. Continued engagement and education are vital to navigating the future of gene patenting responsibly.

About TTC

At TT Consultants, we're a premier provider of custom intellectual property (IP), technology intelligence, business research, and innovation support. Our approach blends AI and Large Language Model (LLM) tools with human expertise, delivering unmatched solutions.

Our team includes skilled IP experts, tech consultants, former USPTO examiners, European patent attorneys, and more. We cater to Fortune 500 companies, innovators, law firms, universities, and financial institutions.


Choose TT Consultants for tailored, top-quality solutions that redefine intellectual property management.

Contact Us

Talk To Our Expert

Contact us now to schedule a consultation and start shaping your patent invalidation strategy with precision and foresight. 

Share Article

Request a Call Back!

Thank you for your interest in TT Consultants. Please fill out the form and we will contact you shortly



    Of Your Ideas

    Elevate Your Patent Knowledge
    Exclusive Insights Await in Our Newsletter

      Request a Call Back!

      Thank you for your interest in TT Consultants. Please fill out the form and we will contact you shortly