While there are still nuances to be ironed out, last year, the fundamental legal question regarding the right to patent human DNA was resolved. We lived through (and even wrote about) the myriad of Myriad court decisions, which culminated in the 2013 Supreme Court decision that DNA, as it exists in nature (as opposed to synthetic DNA), is not patentable. However, what about ownership of DNA? In Who owns your DNA? It’s not who you think, Meredith Knight highlights two cases, one Canadian and one U.S. (which we also wrote about), that considered the question of proprietorship of human tissue samples. In her article, published in Genetic Literacy Project, Knight invites us to reflect on whether DNA ownership should just come down to informed consent — in other words, it’s your liver sample until you formally and expressly give it up. What do you think?