Wisconsin State Journal
Wisconsin politicians have expressed concern that the U.S. Patent Office’s decision to reject three key patents held by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) might undermine the state’s leadership in stem cell research. These patents gave ownership of all human embryonic stem cells to WARF, no matter how or where they were made.
Wisconsin’s leadership in stem cell research has nothing to do with these patents. It has everything to do with the admirable talent and dedication of Wisconsin scientists who devote their lives to this work.
WARF is not a university, and does not perform scientific research. It is a multi-billion dollar institution whose sole aim is to make as much money as possible by patenting and selling the research results of scientists at the University of Wisconsin. The U.S. patent system was designed to stimulate the development of ideas. To win a patent, an invention must be new, useful and non-obvious. But sometimes the patent examiners don’t have all the information they need to make this decision, and sometimes patents are issued for ideas that were already known or even already patented.
By requesting that the embryonic stem cell patents be re-examined, the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights’ John M. Simpson, the Public Patent Foundation’s Dan Ravicher and I gave the patent office the opportunity to rethink and reconsider whether the broad patents on embryonic stem cells should be issued to WARF. We argued, and the patent office agreed, that based on the knowledge that was available at the time, the derivation of monkey and human embryonic stem cells was obvious and predictable. There had been a great deal of previous work on embryonic stem cells, so although the derivation of primate embryonic stem cells was an important scientific advance, it did not qualify as an invention.
WARF‘s executives are understandably unhappy about the patent office’s decision because they think they will lose money. But they could save an enormous amount of money, and gain a great deal of good will, by quietly dropping their claims to human embryonic stem cells and allowing the judgment of the patent office to stand. If they did this, they could be seen as a supporter, not an exploiter, of scientific research.
If Sir Martin Evans of Scotland, who was one of those who first made embryonic stem cells in 1981, were to be awarded the Nobel Prize for his discovery, as is expected, WARF could gracefully take credit for helping scientists build on his landmark research.
Loring is a stem cell researcher at the Burnham Institute for Medical Research in La Jolla, Calif. She can be reached at [email protected]
