Copyright (c) 2009 All rights reserved. http://works.bepress.com/luigi_palombi Recent documents in Luigi Palombi en-us Sat, 18 Jul 2009 06:54:48 PDT 3600 http://works.bepress.com/luigi_palombi/4 http://works.bepress.com/luigi_palombi/4 Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:58:21 PDT The Thesis argues that isolated and purified biological materials which are substantially identical to natural biological materials, such as the human genes that code for erythropoietin, insulin and other proteins, are not 'inventions' within the meaning of the word in article 27.1 TRIPS. Luigi Palombi http://works.bepress.com/luigi_palombi/3 http://works.bepress.com/luigi_palombi/3 Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:46:01 PDT The vast majority of the world's biological resources and traditional knowledge is located in the developing world, yet the vast majority of the world's intellectual property over biotechnology is owned by the developed world. Since the formation of the WTO the developing world has supported the developed world's demands for stronger intellectual property protection. However, as it now seeks the support of the developed world to exploit these resources, it finds that the developed world has only responded with overtures of bilateralism. Furthermore, the expected increases in foreign direct investment have not materialised, yet have continued to flow to China, a country that is the world's largest producer of counterfeit goods. In this paper, Luigi Palombi discusses TRIPS, post-TRIPS bilateralism and patents in the context of biological resources and traditional knowledge and seeks to provide a solution to the present intellectual property deadlock between the developed and developing worlds. Luigi Palombi Law and Society http://works.bepress.com/luigi_palombi/2 http://works.bepress.com/luigi_palombi/2 Mon, 02 Jun 2008 16:40:05 PDT Access to medicines presupposes that there are medicines to access, but the development of medicines, especially those needed to treat diseases that inflict the poor and the disadvantaged, are especially difficult to access because of the pharmaceutical industry's paradigm of medicines being inextricably linked to patents; meaning, without patents there is no incentive to undertake the necessary R&D to develop new medicines. This paper argues that this is a lie; told by pharmaceutical executives and spread by well meaning scientists. Uncontested by policymakers in the 1960's it has become a truth that threatens scientific progress, the development of appropriate medicines and access to medicines for all but those that can afford them. Luigi Palombi Intellectual Property Law Law and Society http://works.bepress.com/luigi_palombi/1 http://works.bepress.com/luigi_palombi/1 Mon, 02 Jun 2008 15:45:44 PDT Even though it is not yet clear as a matter of law that isolated biological materials are indeed patentable subject matter, not only have patents over such materials continued to be granted throughout the world, but the European Parliament passed the Biotechnology Directive in 1998 in an attempt to put an end to the debate. The problem is that TRIPS requires that patents be granted for 'inventions' only and there is a real question over whether isolated biological materials or those made by the use of synthetic biology are indeed inventions within the meaning of the word in TRIPS. But technology is rapidly developing. Recently Craig Venter, the man who wanted to patent the human genome, made history again. This time he has built a synthetic bacterium from the ground up - in a laboratory. The bacterium, Mycoplasma genitalium, is a naturally occurring thing. It is the smallest known bacterium consisting of 582,970 nucleotides. Venter's version of this bacterium is identical, except that he made it. Does this make it an invention? Indeed, Venter has in mind to use this synthetic bacterium and other synthetic biological materials as vectors within which to insert genetic material that is foreign to that organism. The idea is to use these vectors to manufacture other biological materials. It's a repeat of Cohen and Boyer's idea, which they also patented, but this time, the vector itself will be a human construct. Is the patent system ready for Venter and his 'invention'? Luigi Palombi Intellectual Property Law