Visit our website
New America Cypbersecurity Initiative
New America Cypbersecurity Initiative
MIT Technology Review
MIT Technology Review
io9
io9
Techdirt
Techdirt
Knowledge@Wharton
Knowledge@Wharton
Bioscience Technology
Bioscience Technology
redOrbit
redOrbit
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
Popular Science Blog
Popular Science Blog
Pew Research Center
Pew Research Center
Genomics Law Report
Genomics Law Report
Science 2.0
Science 2.0
The Guardian Headquarters
The Guardian Headquarters
Genetic Literacy Project
Genetic Literacy Project
Disclaimer

Statements posted on this blog represent the views of individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Center for Law Science & Innovation (which does not take positions on policy issues) or of the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law or Arizona State University.

Wednesday Web Watch for August 6, 2014

Since last year’s Supreme Court holding that naturally occurring DNA cannot be patented (as distinct from synthetic DNA created in the laboratory), Myriad Genetics has been busy.  First, suing a number of its competitors for patent infringement on patents that withstood the Supreme Court case.  Second, with the announcement of its European expansion and emphasis that it will rely less on patent protections and place greater reliance on the benefits stemming from its vast proprietary database of genetic mutations (and associated health outcomes).  Genomics Law Report editor, John Conley, recently published an article on Myriad’s ex post facto strategy, entitled Myriad After Myriad: The Proprietary Data Dilemma impressing that Myriad’s approach, while doable, undermines certain principles and goals in medical research and health policy.