tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post3021129115897302396..comments2024-03-28T16:45:51.051+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Human Genome Sciences v Eli Lilly - A Little More on the SC judgmentVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-91507284478195087022012-01-08T11:09:03.987+00:002012-01-08T11:09:03.987+00:00To my best understanding this case deals with pros...To my best understanding this case deals with prospective application of "Capable of industrial application". which means that a disease has to be invented in the future else their monopoly is defeated. what is the whole point of it? please advice me.Sooraj K Abrahamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09390289906482457673noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-47816217919890221272011-11-04T21:49:13.747+00:002011-11-04T21:49:13.747+00:00Off-topic, but the major enormity of the Supreme C...Off-topic, but the major enormity of the Supreme Court recently is <i>Rainy Sky v Kookmin</i>, which has (a) definitively knocked <i>contra proferentem</i> on the head, (b) completed the apotheosis of <i>Shoe Lane Parking</i> and established the principle of "contracts mean what the courts think they ought to mean, rather than what they say". But this is irrelevant to the subject-matter of this blog.Tevildohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04769687740240529112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-39109839347331494742011-11-04T21:38:59.088+00:002011-11-04T21:38:59.088+00:00As a non-professional reader, I don't see the ...As a non-professional reader, I don't see the issue as completely clear-cut - the invention _is_ "susceptible" of industrial application, it's just that the nature of that application isn't particularized. I can't help but feel that the judgements below were more criticisms of the drafting ("treating cancer to treating worms") than a serious attack on the substantive issue - if HGS had just put "The invention is potentially of use for the treatment or diagnosis of conditions involving the immune system", rather than a comprehensive list of all possible uses, would it have had a smoother ride?Tevildohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04769687740240529112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-51496209287065507532011-11-03T15:55:50.398+00:002011-11-03T15:55:50.398+00:00Why is the sequence of a naturally-occurring prote...Why is the sequence of a naturally-occurring protein, and information pertaining to that naturally-occurring protein, not a discovery (and therefore unpatentable)? If the patent gave information as to its industrial applicability, I can see that it would go beyond being a mere discovery. Given that it doesn't, though, it is difficult for me to understand why it shouldn't be unpatentable.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com