State of Innovation

Patents and Innovation Economics

Myriad Oral Argument: Supreme Court Analogies show Supreme Ignorance

Yesterday the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics No. 11-725 and once again proved that they are incompetent to rule on patent cases.  The Justice made analogies to baseball bats and chocolate cookies in trying to understand this case involving genetic testing for breast cancer.  For more see USA article and Genetic Engineering and BioTechnology News articles.  Asking these Supreme Court Judges to rule on this decision makes about as much sense as giving a child explosives (This analogy actual works – unlike the Justices).  This would be funny if this case did not involve property rights worth billions of dollars and have the potential to destroy the biotech industry.




The Justices on the Supreme Court neither have the scientific and technical training to rule on patent cases nor do they an appropriate understand of the basics of patent law.  Congress has the power to limit the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction and it should strip it of jurisdiction for patent cases.

April 16, 2013 - Posted by | -Law, Patents | ,


  1. Snip Snip Snip.

    Dick can snip.

    Jane can snip.

    Spot can snip too.

    Snip away those bad bad patent protections. (**)

    (** from the unpublished 1st grade reading primer: ‘Dick and Jane Go Snipping’)

    Snip away at rational comprehension of science and its complexities.

    See the Supremes snip.
    They love to snip:

    Snip Snip Snip.

    It is fun to snip away at patents and their promised protections.

    Look at America’s Tree of Knowledge and Innovation.

    Snip Snip Snip.

    It is gone.

    The end.

    Comment by step back | April 16, 2013 | Reply

  2. Dale,

    I do not always hate to be an ‘I told you so’ guy.

    So about that word, “innovation”.

    Check out these comments at IP-WatchDog:

    If the pro-patent pundits cannot figure out how they have been conned into forgetting about the “inventors” and into starting to model the process as a human-devoid and self propagating thing (the “innovation” thing), then why should we be surprised that the Supreme Court justices can similarly and just as easily be conned into seeing gene snipping as being akin to the ‘mere’ snipping of leaves off of a tree?

    Comment by step back | April 20, 2013 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,567 other followers

%d bloggers like this: