According to a report a patent application, filed by disgraced stem cell scientist Woo Suk Hwang and colleagues and based on work now admitted to be fabricated, may nevertheless be granted.
According to a report a patent application, filed by disgraced stem cell scientist Woo Suk Hwang and colleagues and based on work now admitted to be fabricated, may nevertheless be granted.
Whereas the laws in Europe may provide an adequate canopy of protection to the team the U.S. is a different story. According to the same report:
?In Europe, what matters is whether an invention is novel, inventive and sufficiently described. Fraud is not a ground for invalidating a patent,” he says. ?In the US an applicant has an obligation to give the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) any material information. It is all right to leave out the theory of how the invention works, or even get the theory wrong, as long as you don?t say ?I have built it? when you haven?t. If you do this you may still obtain your patent, but if challenged your patent may not be enforceable?.
Because of this, it has become common practice in the US for anyone accused of infringing a patent to accuse the inventor of ?inequitable conduct? or ?fraud on the Patent Office?, by withholding or misrepresenting information. However, even in cases where information was misrepresented, the patent holder has not always lost the case.”
It would be intersting to see what happens once someone really discovers the method to clone cells as fictitously reoprted by the Korean team.
Read full story here.
Posted on January 18, 2006 by Site Staff
0