These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
141 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11650688)
1. The impact of biotechnology on patent law. Plant DW Technol Soc; 1983; 5(2):95-106. PubMed ID: 11650688 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Biotechnology patent law developments in Great Britain and the United States: analysis of a hypothetical patent claim for a synthesized virus. Auerbach BC Boston College Int Comp Law Rev; 1983; 6(2):563-90. PubMed ID: 11649615 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Patents for life forms: an inappropriate response to biotechnological advancement. Densberger JE J Bioeth; 1984; 5(2):91-115. PubMed ID: 11649700 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Proprietary rights and the norms of science in biotechnology research. Eisenberg RS Yale Law J; 1987 Dec; 97(2):177-231. PubMed ID: 11660398 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. New life in US patents: the Chakrabarty case. Daus DG Eur Intellect Prop Rev; 1981 Jul; 3(7):194-200. PubMed ID: 11650711 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. An international comparative analysis of the patentability of recombinant DNA-derived organisms. Sparrow CN Univ Toledo Law Rev; 1981; 12(4):945-57. PubMed ID: 11649594 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Patent absurdities. Shulman S Sciences (New York); 1999; 39(1):30-3. PubMed ID: 11657926 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Patenting of life forms. Pautler G Trial; 1982 Apr; 18(4):47-50, 76. PubMed ID: 11649513 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Patenting life. Kass LR Commentary; 1981 Dec; 72(6):45-57. PubMed ID: 11649383 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Patent law--patent on life form--man-made modification of microorganism is patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101--Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 100 S.Ct. 2204 (1980). Vidas S Hamline Law Rev; 1981 Jan; 4(2):341-50. PubMed ID: 11650724 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Are living organisms proper subject matter for a patent? United States Supreme Court to decide question of first impression in Parker v. Bergy. Slade RJ; Van den Broder JM West State Univ Law Rev; 1979; 7(1):125-131. PubMed ID: 11662797 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Patent law--life forms found to be within the ambit of Section 101 of the Patent Code. Wolfe CH Cumberland Law Rev; 1980-1981; 11(3):775-98. PubMed ID: 11650571 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Patent law: patentability of micro-organisms. Brennan AA Akron Law Rev; 1980; 14(2):341-9. PubMed ID: 11650627 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Gene engineering: patent for products. Miller JA Sci News; 1984 Sep; 126(10):150. PubMed ID: 11653590 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Gene patent granted: now the real fight begins. Anderson I New Sci; 1984 Sep; 103(1420):7. PubMed ID: 11655626 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Owning our bodies: an examination of property law and biotechnology. Gold R San Diego Law Rev; 1995; 32(4):1167-247. PubMed ID: 11656846 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Designer genes and patent law: a good fit. Bloom A NY Law Sch Law Rev; 1981; 26(4):1041-57. PubMed ID: 11652442 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Patent law--man-made, living microorganisms held patentable subject matter under section 101 of the Patent Act--Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 (1980). Faggen N Temple Law Q; 1981; 54(2):308-30. PubMed ID: 11652407 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Patenting the human genome. Eisenberg RS Emory Law J; 1990; 39(3):721-45. PubMed ID: 11653907 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]