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.
321 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12454661)
1. Shares in the human genome--the future of patenting DNA. Thomas SM; Hopkins MM; Brady M Nat Biotechnol; 2002 Dec; 20(12):1185-8. PubMed ID: 12454661 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Impact of gene patenting on R&D and commerce. Stott M; Valentine J Nat Biotechnol; 2003 Jul; 21(7):729-31; author reply 731. PubMed ID: 12833081 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. DNA patenting: the end of an era? Hopkins MM; Mahdi S; Patel P; Thomas SM Nat Biotechnol; 2007 Feb; 25(2):185-7. PubMed ID: 17287750 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A nail in the coffin for DNA sequence patents? Yamanaka M Nat Biotechnol; 2008 Oct; 26(10):1085-6. PubMed ID: 18846072 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Patenting pluripotence: the next battle for stem cell intellectual property. Vrtovec KT; Scott CT Nat Biotechnol; 2008 Apr; 26(4):393-5. PubMed ID: 18392018 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Public access versus proprietary rights in genomic information: what is the proper role of intellectual property rights? Mueller JM J Health Care Law Policy; 2003; 6(2):222-40. PubMed ID: 15017961 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Who owns the human genome? What can ownership mean with respect to genes? Markl H IIC Int Rev Ind Prop Copyr Law; 2002; 33(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 15156889 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Biotech patenting matures. Lawrence S Nat Biotechnol; 2004 Oct; 22(10):1202. PubMed ID: 15470446 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The Human Genome Project--promise and problems. Kirby M J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1994; 11(1):1-21. PubMed ID: 10142389 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. US court case to define EST patentability. Lawrence S Nat Biotechnol; 2005 May; 23(5):513. PubMed ID: 15877055 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Trends in nanotechnology patents. Chen H; Roco MC; Li X; Lin Y Nat Nanotechnol; 2008 Mar; 3(3):123-5. PubMed ID: 18654475 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Is it right or is it useful? Patenting of the human gene, Lockean property rights, and the erosion of the imago Dei. Cunningham PC Ethics Med; 2003; 19(2):85-98. PubMed ID: 15025114 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. EU to review rare disease drugs market exclusivity. Sheridan C Nat Biotechnol; 2004 Sep; 22(9):1061. PubMed ID: 15340455 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The coming US patent opposition. Apple T Nat Biotechnol; 2005 Feb; 23(2):245-7. PubMed ID: 15696151 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Ownership at too high a price? Nat Biotechnol; 2003 Sep; 21(9):953. PubMed ID: 12949537 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Protecting methods for treatment related to regenerative medicine and gene therapy in Japan. Kaneshiro K; Masuda S; Tanaka Y; Tamai K Nat Biotechnol; 2004 Mar; 22(3):343-5. PubMed ID: 14990960 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Evidence and anecdotes: an analysis of human gene patenting controversies. Caulfield T; Cook-Deegan RM; Kieff FS; Walsh JP Nat Biotechnol; 2006 Sep; 24(9):1091-4. PubMed ID: 16964215 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]