The Patent Eligibility of 3D Bioprinting: Towards a New Version of Living Inventions’ Patentability

A combination of 3D printing techniques and synthetic biology, 3D bioprinting is a promising field. It is expected that 3D bioprinting technologies will have applications across an array of fields, spanning biotechnology, medical surgery and the pharmaceutical industry. Nonetheless, the progress of these technologies could be hindered, unless there is adequate and effective protection for related applications. In this article, the authors examine the patent eligibility of 3D bioprinting technologies. This issue raises concern given that existing patent systems are generally averse to nature-derived inventions and many of them exclude products of nature or discoveries from patentability. This qualitative study analyses the current patent systems in key jurisdictions, particularly, the U.S. and the EU, and their applicability, as well as effectiveness, in the context of 3D bioprinting. The study argues that the main reason for the apathy of existing patent systems towards bio-inventions is that they were designed to deal with mechanical inventions. It suggests an innovation framework that encompasses both mechanical and biological inventions to cater adequately to emerging technologies.

The Battle over Patents

Do patents facilitate or frustrate innovation? Lawyers, economists, and politicians who have staked out strong positions in this debate often attempt to validate their claims by invoking the historical record—but they typically get the history wrong. The purpose of this book is to get the history right by showing that patent systems are the product of contending interests at different points in production chains battling over economic surplus. The larger the potential surplus, the more extreme are the efforts of contending parties, now and in the past, to search out, generate, and exploit any and all sources of friction. Patent systems, as human creations, are therefore necessarily ridden with imperfections; nirvana is not on the menu. The most interesting intellectual issue is not how patent systems are imperfect, but why historically US-style patent systems have come to dominate all other methods of encouraging inventive activity. The answer offered by the essays in this volume is that they create a temporary property right that can be traded in a market, thereby facilitating a productive division of labor and making it possible for firms to transfer technological knowledge to one another by overcoming the free-rider problem. Precisely because the value of a patent does not inhere in the award itself but rather in the market value of the resulting property right, patent systems foster a decentralized ecology of inventors and firms that ceaselessly extends the frontiers of what is economically possible.

Introduction: The Battle over the Surplus from Innovation

Do patents facilitate or frustrate innovation? Our starting point for exploring this question is the recognition that patent systems are products of battles over the economic surplus created by innovation. The features of these systems take shape as contending interests at different points in the production chain seek advantage in any way they can, and consequently they are riven with imperfections. The most interesting intellectual issue is not how patent systems are imperfect, but why historically US-style patent systems with all their imperfections have come to dominate other methods of encouraging inventive activity. The essays that follow this introduction suggest that the creation of a tradable but temporary property right facilitates the transfer of technological knowledge and thus fosters a highly productive decentralized ecology of inventors and firms.

A Quest to Prohibit Immoral Inventions? An Analysis of Law and Policy in Human Biotechnology

This paper consists of an identification and analysis of the place of, and role of ethics play, in the various patent systems currently in force in Europe. As for the rapid evolution of biotechnology advances, it is significant to observe the response from legislators and the measures put in place to address the further issues. Contemporaneously, this work aims to act as a commentary on the relationship of biotechnology with intellectual property rights, and on the role played in this respect by law.

Low-Quality Patents in the Eye of the Beholder: Evidence from Multiple Examiners

A low-quality patent system threatens to slow the pace of technological progress. Concerns about low patent quality are supported by estimates from litigation studies suggesting that most US patents granted should not have been issued. We propose a new model for measuring patent quality, based on equivalent patent applications submitted to multiple offices. Our method allows us to distinguish whether low-quality patents are issued because an office implements a low standard or because it violates its own standard. The results suggest that quality in patent systems is higher than previously thought. Specifically, the percentage of granted patents that are below each office’s own standard is under 10% for all offices. The Japanese patent office has a higher percentage of granted patents below its own standard than those from Europe, the USA, Korea, and China. This result arises from the fact that Japan has a higher standard than other offices. (JEL O34, K2, L4, F42)