A landmark paper published 14 October 2005 by Dr Kyle Jensen and Dr Fiona Murray matched DNA sequences in granted US patents to the Genbank database refseq_rna, then mapped those hits against the fully sequenced human genome to show that the use of a large proportion of the sequence, much of which was obtained at public expense, may not be in the public domain. US patents on human genome sequence, giving the right to exclude use in the US or in implementations that will be imported into the US, are largely owned by private companies, or by public sector institutions that often exclusively license the rights to private companies.
At the time Jensen and Murray did their paper, only information on sequences in some US granted patents was readily searchable in GenBank's patnt database (they found 11,081 patent grants containing "SEQUENCE LISTING" and "SEQ ID" that were not in GenBank's patnt database) and sequence from patent applications was not readily searchable.
CAMBIA has since extracted the sequences from US published patent applications, and delineated which are in the claims (as opposed to those elsewhere in the specification). These data (Bacon N, Ashton D, Jefferson RA, Connett MB, 2006, Biological sequences named and claimed in US patents and patent applications, CAMBIA Patent Lens OS4 Initiative) could be used in future to do a more thorough analysis of patenting trends in the human genome and other completely sequenced genomes. If you are interested in collaboration, please contact us.
Coming soon to the Patent Lens: We at CAMBIA have been doing the work to make it possible to do a thorough landscape of the rice and Arabidopsis genomes (Connett et al. in prep.), which will present matching DNA sequences not only in US granted patents but also in pending patent applications, and related patent documents in other jurisdictions such as China.
Acknowledgement: Significant funding for collection of sequence data from published applications and delineation of claimed sequences in the data was provided by the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Norway through the International Rice Research Institute for CAMBIA's Patent Lens (the OS4 Initiative: Open Source, Open Science, Open Society, Orzya sativa). We are further grateful for computer time and the assistance of Gavin Kennedy of CSIRO to run the BLAST comparisons with the full human genome.
See also:
A landmark paper published 14. October 2005 by Jensen and Murray matched DNA sequences in granted US patents to the fully sequenced human genome to show that the use of a large proportion of the sequence, much of which was obtained at public expense, may not be in the public domain. Why is this a problem? At the time Jensen and Murray did their paper, only information on sequences in US granted patents was available.
CAMBIA has since scraped the sequences from US published patent applications, and determined which are in the claims. These data (Bacon N, Ashton D, Jefferson RA, Connett MB 2006 "Biological sequences named and claimed in US patents and patent applications" CAMBIA Patent Lens OS4 Initiative) can be used in future for more analysis of genome patenting trends. Interested in collaboration?
The Y axis shows the percentage of the genome covered by matches to sequences referenced in claims.
These graphs were generated by Neil Bacon with Dr Marie Connett Porceddu; we are further grateful for the computer time and the assistance of Gavin Kennedy of CSIRO to run the BLAST comparisons with the full human genome.
See also:
A landmark paper published 14. October 2005 by Jensen and Murray matched DNA sequences in granted US patents to the fully sequenced human genome to show that the use of a large proportion of the sequence, much of which was obtained at public expense, may not be in the public domain. Why is this a problem? At the time Jensen and Murray did their paper, only information on sequences in US granted patents was available.
CAMBIA has since scraped the sequences from US published patent applications, and determined which are in the claims. These data (Bacon N, Ashton D, Jefferson RA, Connett MB 2006 "Biological sequences named and claimed in US patents and patent applications" CAMBIA Patent Lens OS4 Initiative) can be used in future for more analysis of genome patenting trends. Interested in collaboration?
The Y axis shows the number of patent applications with a claim that references a sequence which matches a segment at least 150bp long within the 300kbp range. Continuations and divisionals are counted as well as their parent.
These graphs were generated by Neil Bacon with Dr Marie Connett Porceddu; we are further grateful for the computer time and the assistance of Gavin Kennedy of CSIRO to run the BLAST comparisons with the full human genome.
See also:
A landmark paper published 14. October 2005 by Jensen and Murray matched DNA sequences in granted US patents to the fully sequenced human genome to show that the use of a large proportion of the sequence, much of which was obtained at public expense, may not be in the public domain. Why is this a problem? At the time Jensen and Murray did their paper, only information on sequences in US granted patents was available.
CAMBIA has since scraped the sequences from US published patent applications, and determined which are in the claims. These data (Bacon N, Ashton D, Jefferson RA, Connett MB 2006 "Biological sequences named and claimed in US patents and patent applications" CAMBIA Patent Lens OS4 Initiative) can be used in future for more analysis of genome patenting trends. Interested in collaboration?
The Y axis shows the number of sequences referenced in claims which match a segment at least 150bp long within the 300kbp range. Continuations and divisionals are counted as well as their parent, so the same sequence is counted multiple times in some cases, although the claims covering these sequences may be different in the different applications (for example, in some applications the sequence and complements may be covered, while in others the claim may be to sequences similar to or hybridising to the sequence, or to RNAi molecules derived from it).
These graphs were generated by Neil Bacon with Dr Marie Connett Porceddu; we are further grateful for the computer time and the assistance of Gavin Kennedy of CSIRO to run the BLAST comparisons with the full human genome.
The plot below shows the the total number of U.S. patent applications containing sequence listings from 2001 through the second quarter of 2005. The plot was constructed with data from applications published since 15 March 2001, when applications were first made available in the XML format. The data do not extend to the current date due to the 18 month lag between when an application is filed and when the application generally publishes.
The graph below shows the average number of sequences referenced in claims over the same time period.
A U.S. Patent gives a patentee the right to exclude others from using the patented technology in the U.S. The patentee may allow others to use the technology only upon payment of license fees or royalties, or may not allow its use at all. U.S. laws also give the patentee the right to prevent import of implementations from other countries that use the technology patented in the U.S., even if it is not patented in the country of origin.
Isolated DNA sequences claimed under "composition of matter" claims in a U.S. patent are like any other patented technology in this respect. If used in a way that is covered by the claims of a patent that is in force, the user may be subject to being stopped by injunction or being required to pay royalties.
Many US patents on DNA and amino acid sequences, giving the right to exclude use in the US or in implementations that will be imported into the US, are owned by private companies, or by public sector institutions that have often exclusively licensed the rights to private companies.
Sequences identified here are in published U.S. patent applications. Patents over these sequences may or may not eventually or already be granted. However, potential users of any such sequence are considered to be "on notice" from the published patent application that they may be required to obtain a license in exchange for payments if a patent is granted. Under U.S. law, the patentee may be entitled to charge royalties from the date of publication. Thus, though a biological sequence might be published in a journal or Genbank, but it could be no more "public" than the copyrighted matter of a published book or a movie in theaters is "in the public domain." If it's in a patent application, furthermore, uncertainty about whether a patent may be granted is often enough to deter potential users and investors.
This PDF copy is dated April 11, 2007. Changes may have been made to this
Technology Landscape after this date.
Download
PDF (info)
The information contained in this page was believed to be correct at the time it was collated. New patents and patent applications, altered status of patents, and case law may have resulted in changes in the landscape. CAMBIA makes no warranty that it is correct or up to date at this time and accepts no liability for any use that might be made of it. Corrections or updates to the information are welcome. Please send an email to info@bios.net.
The information contained in this page was believed to be correct at the time it was collated. New patents and patent applications, altered status of patents, and case law may have resulted in changes in the landscape. CAMBIA makes no warranty that it is correct or up to date at this time and accepts no liability for any use that might be made of it. Corrections or updates to the information are welcome, please send an email to info@bios.net.
