This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22895161

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
US Supreme Court says human DNA cannot be patented US Supreme Court says human DNA cannot be patented
(35 minutes later)
Human genes may not be patented, the US Supreme Court has ruled unanimously, in a decision that could have a major impact on genetic research. Human genes may not be patented, but artificially copied DNA can be claimed as intellectual property, the US Supreme Court has ruled unanimously.
The justices struck down patents on two genes believed to increase breast and ovarian cancer risk. The court quashed patents held by a Utah-based firm on two genes believed linked to breast and ovarian cancer.
The opinion said DNA came from nature and was not eligible for patenting.The opinion said DNA came from nature and was not eligible for patenting.
But lower courts had allowed it, saying such DNA was isolated and had a "markedly different chemical structure" from other human genetic material. The US pharmaceutical industry had warned any blanket ban on gene patents would jeopardise huge investment in gene research and therapies.
Thursday's compromise ruling, which had been urged by the Obama administration, is widely expected to shield existing patents involving synthetic molecules known as complementary DNA.
Shares in the company affected, Myriad Genetics, rose after the decision was published.
'Different chemical structure'
The legal battle was prompted by a lawsuit from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in 2009 that centred on whether companies should be able to patent genes.
Currently, researchers and private companies work to isolate genes in order to use them in tests for gene-related illnesses, and in emerging gene therapies.
The genes in question are linked to breast and ovarian cancer, and Myriad Genetics developed a test to look for mutations in those genes that might increase the risk of developing cancer.
The company, based in Salt Lake City, argued that the genes patented were "isolated" by them, making them products of human ingenuity and therefore patentable.
But the ACLU argued that genes are products of nature, and therefore cannot be patented under US laws.
In 2010 a New York federal court ruled in favour of the ACLU.
But an appeals court on two separate occasions sided with Myriad. It said DNA isolated from the human body had a "markedly different chemical structure" from other human genetic material.
Universities and medical research firms have been able to claim intellectual property over human genes for nearly three decades.
According to researchers at Weill Cornell Medical College in the US, patents now cover some 40% of the human genome.