Lawson Charles
Australian Centre for Intellectual Property in Agriculture, Griffith Law School, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland.
J Law Med. 2018 Apr;25(3):741-764.
The High Court in D'Arcy v Myriad Genetics Inc (2015) 258 CLR 334; [2015] HCA 35 addressed patent claims under the Patents Act 1990 Cth to deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) sequences set out in tables listing nucleotides as As, Ts, Gs and Cs finding they are unpatentable. This was a significant development given DNA sequences have been patentable for decades. This article reviews the High Court's judgments in D'Arcy v Myriad Genetics Inc highlighting the introduction of ambiguities to the current subject matter standards and providing a critique of the High Court majority's assessment of DNA sequence as information. The article concludes that the High Court majority has introduced an unhelpful conception of information as a standard for patentability. While this will limit claims to DNA and other nucleic acid sequences, the broader effect of the decision is uncertain because the High Court majority's conception of information could be applied to any matter (including all molecules) and eviscerate the patent system.
高等法院在达西诉Myriad基因公司案(2015)258 CLR 334;[2015] HCA 35中,针对《1990年联邦专利法》下关于以A、T、G、C表示核苷酸的表格中列出的脱氧核糖核酸(DNA)序列的专利主张,认定这些序列不可授予专利。鉴于DNA序列几十年来一直可获专利,这是一个重大发展。本文回顾了高等法院在达西诉Myriad基因公司案中的判决,强调了对当前主题标准引入的模糊性,并对高等法院多数意见将DNA序列视为信息的评估进行了批判。文章得出结论,高等法院多数意见引入了一种无益的信息概念作为可专利性标准。虽然这将限制对DNA和其他核酸序列的主张,但该判决的更广泛影响尚不确定,因为高等法院多数意见的信息概念可能适用于任何事物(包括所有分子)并使专利制度形同虚设。