The Myriad decision set a global precedent against patenting genes – only limited patenting of legacy sequences occurs now
Jorge L. Contreras, 2023 - James T. Jensen Endowed Professor for Transactional Law and Director of the Program on Intellectual Property and Technology Law, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law. Adjunct Professor, Department of Human Genetics, University of Utah School of Medicine “ PATHOGEN GENOMES AS GLOBAL PUBLIC GOODS (AND WHY THEY SHOULD NOT BE PATENTED)”, 55 N.Y.U. J. Int'l L. & Pol. 533, Nexis Uni, Accessed via University of Michigan //DH
As shown in Part III.A, attempts by research groups to patent pathogenic genomic sequences were fairly routine prior to the 2013 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Myriad.
These patents, however, resulted in disruption and delays to research during major disease outbreaks such as SARS, H5N1 influenza and MERS. After Myriad, though the sharing of pathogenic sequences has not always been without political controversy,115 patents on genomic sequences appear to have played little or no role in these disputes. Though some patents on pathogenic sequences have recently been issued in, for example, Europe (MERS)116 and Canada (Ebola),117 these are largely the result of legacy applications filed prior to the Myriad decision. Few patents claiming pathogenic genomic sequences have been filed anywhere after the Myriad decision.118
Why does Myriad, a U.S. Court decision, seem to carry such weight on a global scale? One possibility is that the demise of genomic sequence patents in the United States established a new set of international norms and expectations around pathogenic patenting. Researchers identifying a new pathogenic strain, aware that patents are unavailable in the United States, might not find it worthwhile to file elsewhere when research, development, and production could proceed there unimpeded by such patents.