Premium
Patent power in biomedical innovation: Technology governance in biomodifying technologies
Author(s) -
Bicudo Edison,
Morrison Michael,
Li Phoebe,
Faulkner Alex,
Webster Andrew,
Mourby Miranda,
Kaye Jane
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
the journal of world intellectual property
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.334
H-Index - 8
eISSN - 1747-1796
pISSN - 1422-2213
DOI - 10.1111/jwip.12237
Subject(s) - politics , corporate governance , transparency (behavior) , dominance (genetics) , accountability , business , emerging technologies , induced pluripotent stem cell , law and economics , political science , economics , biology , law , nanotechnology , gene , finance , genetics , embryonic stem cell , materials science
Abstract Biomedical innovation is often rewarded by exclusive proprietary rights such as patents. In the case of gene editing, induced pluripotent stem cells, and three‐dimensional (3D) bioprinting (here described as biomodifying technologies), the limitations of the patent system come into stark relief, generating both technical and political doubts. Generally, political and technological limitations are supposed to be solved with so‐called good governance, based on some principles. We focus on three of such governance principles (participation, accountability, and transparency) to show how they have been weakened, instead of strengthened, by the current patent system. We demonstrate that although patent applications are submitted by both public and private players, the latter have imposed a growing dominance in gene editing, induced pluripotent stem cells, and 3D bioprinting, disseminating their aggressive and exclusive strategies. As a consequence, a logic of experimentality tends to prevail where the three fundamental governance principles fail to be enacted.