When the US Supreme Court decided in favour of Monsanto in its case against a soybean farmer, it clarified the patent status of certain self-replicating technologies. In Europe, the result would probably have been the same, say Steven Zeman and Heike Vogelsang-Wenke.
Under the doctrine of patent exhaustion, a patentee should have the chance to exercise its monopoly just once per patented product.
After the product comes to market, then the patentee’s rights are exhausted. But exhaustion is item-specific: it applies only to the specific articles the patentee has allowed on to the market, and does not apply to identical articles that have not been expressly allowed.
Sounds simple enough, right? But exhaustion becomes less clear-cut when the patented product can self-replicate. For instance, a patented seed grows into a plant producing more of the same (also patented) seeds. Can the doctrine of patent exhaustion apply here too? Consider it: virtually limitless quantities of ‘patented’ daughter seeds can be obtained from just one purchased seed.
Life Sciences Intellectual Property Review (LSIPR) tracks the increasing challenges for intellectual property specialists in the rapidly evolving world of life sciences. From gene patents to stem cell research, we provide the very best news and analysis.
To continue reading this article and to access 4,500+ articles, our digital magazines and special reports published for LSIPR subscribers only then you will need a subscription.
If you are already subscribed please login.
Official LSIPR subscribers include:
Allen & Overy
Arnold & Siedsma
Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch LLP (BSKB)
Carpmaels & Ransford
European Patent Office
George Washington Law School
Kirkland & Ellis International LLP
Marks & Clerk
NiKang Therapeutics Inc.
Powell Gilbert LLP
Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
World Intellectual Property Office
Monsanto, IP, patents, self-replicating, Supreme Court