Question

Consider and answer the following questions.

What are the most persuasive arguments in favor of and against allowing the patentability of higher life forms?

Does your answer change depending on whether the subject is bacteria, plants, animals or humans?

What is the effect on business where the patents are deemed valid? Where they are not granted?

Cite a specific example from a credible source to support your opinion.

Answer 1

Patenting of Higher Life Forms includes patenting plant, seeds, non-human animals, bacteria. It doesn't and shouldn't include humans.  

SOCIAL AND ETHICAL CONCERNS - the commodification of life, equitable distribution of the benefits that come from biological inventiveness, the preservation and use of common and local knowledge, animal welfare, the consolidation of ownership and resulting reduction of competition, possible violations of economic power and access to genetic resources.

The main purpose of patents is not to reward of the person but the progression of the arts and sciences. Its attraction is directed to revealing of advances of knowledge which will be useful to society

If the patent system directs at attaining the public good and matches the belief of justice, it can be permitted. The patent system achieves this goal by providing originators with enough incentive -- but not more than enough -- to publish their inventions and to make their designs available to the public This involves a balance of interests of the different stakeholders in any given field of endeavor. In other words, the formulation of the patent system with respect to higher life forms calls for a confinement to justice.

A case was about a patent request filed by the Harvard College for a transgenic rodent. Supreme Court confirmed the rejection of patent mentioning that higher forms of life aren't patentable following the Canadian Patents Act.