Until Judge Sweet’s decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (Myriad), gene patentability in the United States has evaded prohibition for more than three decades since Diamond v. Chakrabarty. The Myriad decision has captured the imagination of the legal community—but not in isolation. This article examines Myriad through the lens of two contemporary European decisions related to gene patenting, Eli Lilly & Co. v Human Genome Sciences, Inc and Monsanto Technology LLC v. Cefetra BV, suggesting that Myriad is a narrative that evolves at the intersection of law’s aspiration, humanity’s common heritage, and corporate realities of the twenty-first century. The article examines the possibility of a future paradigmrelated to common heritage and distributive justice.
Saby Ghoshray, Interpreting Myriad: Acquiring Patent Law's Meaning Through Contemporary Jurisprudence and Humanistic Viewpoint of Common Heritage of DNA, 10 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 508 (2011)