A metaphorical history of DNA patents

Ivo Silvestro

Ivo Silvestro

Keywords: DNA, DNA metaphors, patents, information

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to retrace the history of genetic patents, analyzing the metaphors used in the public debate, in patent offices, and in courtrooms. I have identified three frames with corresponding metaphor clusters: the first is the industrial frame, built around the idea that DNA is a chemical; the second is the informational frame, assembled around the concept of genetic information; last is the soul frame, based on the idea that DNA is or contains the essence of the individual.

References

BURIAN, Richard M. (2000), «On the internal dynamics of mendelian genetics», in Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences - Series III - Sciences de la Vie, vol. 323 (12), pp. 1127-1137.

CALVERT, Jane, JOLY Pierre-Benoît (2011), «How did the gene become a chemical compound? The ontology of the gene and the patenting of DNA», in Social Science Information, vol. 50 (2), pp. 157-177.

COLYVAS, Jeannette A. (2007), «Factory, Hazard, and Contamination: The Use of Metaphor in the Commercialization of Recombinant DNA», in Minerva, vol. 45 (2), pp. 143-159.

CONTRERAS, Jorge L. (2011), «Bermuda’s Legacy: Policy, Patents and the Design of the Genome Commons», in Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, vol. 12, pp. 61-125.

COOK-DEEGAN, Robert (1996), The Gene Wars: Science, Politics, and the Human Genome, W.W. Norton & Co., New York.

DELBRÜCK, Max (1976), «How Aristotle discovered DNA», in AIP Conference Proceedings, AIP Publishing, vol. 28, pp. 123-130.

DOLIN, Gregory (2013), «Patents at the Supreme Court: It Could’ve Been Worse», in Cato Supreme Court Review, vol. 267, pp. 267-282.

DUPRÈ, John (2004), «Understanding Contemporary Genomics», in Perspectives on Science, vol. 12 (3), pp. 320-338.

FELDMAN, Maryann P., COLAIANNI, Alessandra, KANG LIU, Connie (2007), Lessons from the commercialization of the Cohen-Boyer patents: the Stanford University licensing program, in ANATOLE Krattiger (ed.), Intellectual Property Management in Health and Agricultural Innovation: A Handbook of Best Practices, MIHR, PIPRA, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, and bioDevelopments-International Institute, pp. 28-36.

FLORIDI, Luciano (2011), The Philosophy of Information, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

GAZZANIGA, Michael S. (2008), «The law and neuroscience», in Neuron, vol. 60 (3), pp. 412-415.

GLEICK, James (2012), The Information: A History, A Theory, A Flood, Vintage Books, New York (L’informazione. Una storia, Una teoria, Un diluvio, trad. di, SALA Virginio B., Feltrinelli, Milano 2012).

GOLD, E. Richard, CARBONE Julia (2010), «Myriad Genetics: In the eye of the policy storm», in Genetics in medicine: official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, vol. 12 (4), Suppl, S39-S70.

GRIFFITHS, Paul E. (2001), «Genetic information: a metaphor in search of a theory», in Philosophy of Science, vol. 68 (3), pp. 394-412.

HALLYN, Fernand (2014), Metaphor and Analogy in the Sciences, Springer, Berlin

HELLSTEN, Iina, NERLICH, Brigitte (2011), «Synthetic biology: building the language for a new science brick by metaphorical brick», in New Genetics and Society, vol. 30 (4), pp. 375-397.

HUGHES, Sally S. (2001), «Making dollars out of DNA. The first major patent in biotechnology and the commercialization of molecular biology, 1974-1980», in Isis; an international review devoted to the history of science and its cultural influences, vol. 92 (3), pp. 541-575.

HULL, David L. (1974), Philosophy of Biological Science, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.

JOLIE, Angelina (2013), «My Medical Choice», in The New York Times, May 14th 2013.

KELLER, Evelyn Fox (2000), The Century of the Gene, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts and London, England.

KEVLES, Daniel J. (1994), «Ananda Chakrabarty wins a patent: biotechnology, law, and society, 1972-1980», in Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences, vol. 25 (1), pp. 111-135.

KEVLES, Daniel J. (2007), «Patents, Protections, and Privileges», in Isis, vol. 98 (2), pp. 323-331.

LAKOFF, George, JOHNSON, Mark (1980), Metaphors We Live By, University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London (Metafora e vita quotidiana, trad. di, Violi Patrizia, Bompiani, Milano 1982).

LONGO, Giuseppe, MIGUEL, Paul-Antoine, SONNENSCHEIN, Carlos, SOTO, A.M. (2012), «Is information a proper observable for biological organization?», in Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology, vol. 109 (3), pp. 108-114.

MATTHIJS, Gert, HUYS, Isabelle, VAN OVERWALLE, Geertrui, STOPPA-LYONNET Dominique (2013), «The European BRCA patent oppositions and appeals: coloring inside the lines», in Nat Biotechnol, vol. 31 (8), pp. 704-710.

NELKIN, Dorothy, LINDEE M. Susan (1996), The DNA Mystique: The Gene As a Cultural Icon, University of Michigan, Michigan.

NELKIN, Dorothy, LINDEE M. Susan (2004), The DNA Mystique: The Gene As a Cultural Icon, University of Michigan, Michigan.

NELSON, Alondra (2016), The Social Life of DNA: Race, Reparations, and Reconciliation After the Genome, Beacon Press, Boston.

OSSORIO, Pilar N. (2007), «The Human Genome as Common Heritage: Common Sense or Legal Nonsense?», in The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, vol. 35 (3), pp. 425-439.

PATTERSON, Earl Byron (1971), US Patent 3,710,511.

PIECZENIK, George (1980), Brief of Dr. George Pieczenik, Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 (1980).

PIGLIUCCI, Massimo (2010), «Genotype-phenotype mapping and the end of the ‘genes as blueprint’ metaphor», in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, vol. 365 (1540), pp. 557-566.

PIGLIUCCI, Massimo, BOUDRY Maarten (2010), «Why Machine-Information Metaphors are Bad for Science and Science Education», in Science & Education, vol. 20 (5-6), pp. 453-471.

QUELOZ, Matthieu (2015), «The Double Nature of DNA: Reevaluating the Common Heritage Idea», in Journal of Political Philosophy, vol. 24 (1).

RAI, Arti, KUMAR, Sapna (2007), «Synthetic Biology: The Intellectual Property Puzzle», in Texas Law Review, vol. 85, pp. 1745-1768.

RESNIK, David B. (2004), Owning the Genome: A Moral Analysis of DNA Patenting, State University of New York Press, Albany.

REYNOLDS, Andrew (2007), «The cell’s journey: from metaphorical to literal factory», in Endeavour, vol. 31 (2), pp. 65-70.

ROBERTS, Leslie (1987), «Who owns the human genome?», in Science, vol. 237, pp. 358-361.

ROBERTS, Leslie (1992), «Why Watson Quit as Project Head», in Science, vol. 256 (5055), pp. 301-302.

SCARNECCHIA, Brian, ETHICS & RELIGIOUS LIBERTY COMMISSION OF THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION (2013), Brief for amici curiae of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention and Prof. D. Brian Scarnecchia, Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics Inc., 569 U.S. ___ (2013).

SHANNON, Claude E. (1948), «A mathematical theory of communication», in The Bell System Technical Journal, vol. 27, pp. 379-374.

STABLEFORD, Brian (2004), Historical Dictionary of Science Fiction Literature, Scarecrow Press, Lanham, Maryland, Toronto, Oxford.

STURGES, Melissa L. (1999), «Who Should Hold Property Rights to the Human Genome? An Application of the Common Heritage of Humankind», in American University International Law Review, vol. 13 (1), pp. 219-261.

TAGLIABUE, Giovanni (2015), «The nonsensical GMO pseudo-category and a precautionary rabbit hole», in Nat Biotechnol, vol. 33 (9), pp. 907-908.

US, JAPAN, AND EUROPEAN PATENT OFFICES (1988), Joint Policy Statement.

WATSON, James D. (2013), Brief of James D. Watson, Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics Inc., 569 U.S.___(2013).

WATSON, James D., CRICK Francis H. (1953a), «Letters to nature: Molecular structure of nucleic acid», in Nature, vol. 171 (737), pp. 738.

WATSON, James D., CRICK Francis H. (1953b), «Genetical implications of the structure of deoxyribonucleic acid», in Nature, vol. 171 (4361) pp. 964-967.