The genes are claimed in 4270 patents that are owned by 1156 different assignees. Approximately 63% of the assignees are private firms. One firm,
Incyte Pharmaceuticals/Incyte Genomics, has patents on 2,000 human genes. A majority of the patented genes, at least 3000, have only a single intellectual property (IP) rights holder. But some genes related to human health and disease, such as BRCA1 that is linked to early onset breast cancer, have multiple patents covering rights to various uses of the gene. Researchers who want to work on a multi-patented gene may have to spend large amounts on complex licensing agreements in order to gain access.
The authors note that
“…the classic argument in support of gene patenting is that strong IP protection provides incentives crucial to downstream investment and the disclosure of inventions.” On the other hand, critics of gene sequence patents fear that broad patents will hinder downstream research activities. Also, innovators may be deterred by an ‘anticommons’ effect, where
“…people underuse scarce resources because too many owners can block each other” [
Heller M. and Eisenberg R. (1998) Science 280, 698-701]. Little empirical research has been done on the extent of gene patenting, according to Jensen and Murray. They suggest that the current patent examination system could be reviewed to see if the process is responsible for multiple conflicting patents being granted on the same gene. Genes that have multiple patents provide an opportunity
“…to explore the variety of arrangements used to facilitate or block access to gene-based research and the impact of these arrangements on future innovators.” Such studies could provide beneficial information to inform the patent debate.