The EPO and the "milk cow" patent

In case you were wondering what the "German language only" EPO press release of 3 March 2010 date is telling you concerning EP 1330552 ("marker assisted selection of bovine for improved milk production using diacylglycerol acyltransferase gene DGAT1" - a patent which claims processes for breeding cows that give more milk or milk including altered constituents) here is the IPKat's quick summary.

After an oral hearing that was held at the EPO on 2 March 2010 in opposition proceedings that were brought by Greenpeace Germany and the society of German milk farmers (Bundesverband deutscher Milchviehzüchter) against this particular patent, the EPO today tells us that it has decided in favour of the patent's proprietors. The patent still stands. In particular, the EPO's opposition division found that there was no sufficient proof that the patented invention caused the cows "pain without any significant medical use for humans or animals" as argued by the opponents.

If German media is to be believed (which covers this topic widely) then Greenpeace e.V. might decide to file an appeal against this decision.
The EPO and the "milk cow" patent The EPO and the "milk cow" patent Reviewed by Birgit Clark on Thursday, March 04, 2010 Rating: 5


  1. why is the press release in German and not also available in English? HELLOOOOOO!!

  2. @Anon: do you understand the word "currently"?

  3. "currently" - like they were currently looking for a new president, yeah?

  4. "why is the press release in German and not also available in English? HELLOOOOOO!!"

    Probably because only in Germany there is a public controversy about this case.


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.