Patents… legal battlefront…
To be eligible for patent protection, an invention must be a “process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.” Moreover, it must not fall into one of three categories of excluded subject matter, the so-called judicial exceptions to patent eligibility, which include laws of nature, abstract ideas, and natural phenomena.
This animating principle excludes naturally occurring psychedelics, and the plants and fungi that produce them, from patent eligibility – inventors cannot patent them because they are… [natural phenomena]. In many cases, only large, well-capitalized firms can navigate the murky regulatory waters surrounding psychedelics research and development. Granting patent exclusivity enhances existing disparities, and the unique characteristics of psychedelics, together with the regulatory environment surrounding them, may increase the likelihood of issuing bad patents — patents granted on inventions that do not meet patent-ability requirements or that were patented in bad faith to block competition. The possibility of issuing bad patents on psychedelics is likely increased because the PTO lacks examiners with sufficient knowledge of these substances and their history. Due to a longstanding prohibition, few people have developed deep expertise in the field. The associated stigma and criminalization could threaten one’s professional reputation and employment prospects. A lack of examiners with detailed knowledge of psychedelic compounds, and their history… allow[s] bad patents to breeze through the PTO without opposition.
Original Article (Psilocybin net):
Patents on psychedelics: the next legal battlefront of drug development
Artwork Fair Use: Prankster239
