Summary: The scandalous policy of privatising genetics continues to come under extraordinary fire
The practice of patenting non-ideas such as nature has been under fire here for years, but now the SCOTUS has a chance to do something about it. Don’t hold your breath though, there might be a patent on this process. Seriously though, the Supreme Court has a habit of supreme systemic corruption which favours corporations over public interests and sanity. The infamous genetics patents will probably be no exception.
Timothy B. Lee asks, “Will the Supreme Court end human gene patents after three decades?”
“…Supreme Court has a habit of supreme systemic corruption which favours corporations over public interests and sanity.”Probably not. Here are the legal materials and SCOTUS Blog supporting the Court.
The 'legal community' (meaning people who exploit the law for profit) hijacked the discussion, with patent lawyers dominating in their responses and other patent sites controlling the flow of information. If you deviate from their consensus, you are ‘radical’. Speaking of patents on genetics, see this article about corruption, starting as follows: “As I reported a couple of weeks ago, a recent Senate bill came with a nice bonus for the genetically modified seed industry: a rider, wholly unrelated to the underlying bill, that compels the USDA to ignore federal court decisions that block the agency’s approvals of new GM crops. I explained in this post why such a provision, which the industry has been pushing for over a year, is so important to Monsanto and its few peers in the GMO seed industry.” The article names Sen. Roy Blunt as one whom Monsanto paid to pass policies relating to its patent monopolies (on crop genetics).
Jones says: “So, anti-software patents folks could just collect some money and hand it to a Senator and get patent reform? hat’s how it works?”
Yes, of course. Not just when it comes to patents. The system is rigged. █