222 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9181584)
21. 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]
22. The gene patenting controversy: a convergence of law, economic interests, and ethics.
Kevles DJ; Berkowitz A
Brooklyn Law Rev; 2001; 67(1):233-48. PubMed ID: 12645549
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Intellectual property in higher life forms: the patent system and controversial technologies.
Merges RP
MD Law Rev; 1988; 47(4):1051-75. PubMed ID: 16514761
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Written description.
Becker DM
Nat Rev Drug Discov; 2004 Oct; 3(10):821. PubMed ID: 15497245
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Patents. Signature on visitor's form fuels Stanford v. Roche court battle.
Marshall E
Science; 2011 Apr; 332(6026):163. PubMed ID: 21474725
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Genomics companies welcome US PTO initiative on DNA patents.
Marshall A
Nat Biotechnol; 1997 Feb; 15(2):121-2. PubMed ID: 9035129
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. The scope of utility in the twenty-first century: new guidance for gene-related patents.
Summers TM
Georgetown Law J; 2003 Jan; 91(2):475-509. PubMed ID: 15046071
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. A benchside guide to patents and patenting.
Johnson E
Nat Biotechnol; 1996 Mar; 14(3):288-91. PubMed ID: 9630888
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Have you bargained away patent rights? Inventors and entrepreneurs need to consider a recent Supreme Court ruling in their patent strategies.
Baggot B
Nat Biotechnol; 1999 Mar; 17(3):297-8. PubMed ID: 10096300
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. What Markman should mean to you.
Rzucidlo EC; Auth DR
Nat Biotechnol; 1996 Jul; 14(7):888-90. PubMed ID: 9631017
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Super-enzyme patents get their day in court.
Cyranoski D
Nature; 2002 Oct; 419(6909):767. PubMed ID: 12397315
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. OTA panel opens inquiry into patenting of genes.
Macilwain C
Nature; 1993 Apr; 362(6419):386. PubMed ID: 8464461
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. DNA-based patents: an empirical analysis.
Mills AE; Tereskerz P
Nat Biotechnol; 2008 Sep; 26(9):993-5. PubMed ID: 18779808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. The Supreme Court and patenting life.
Hastings Cent Rep; 1980 Oct; 10(5):10-5. PubMed ID: 6934170
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Patenting human life and the rebirth of the Thirteenth Amendment.
McDonald ES
Notre Dame Law Rev; 2003 May; 78(4):1359-87. PubMed ID: 15237536
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. International conflicts over patenting human DNA sequences in the United States and the European Union: an argument for compulsory licensing and a fair-use exemption.
Gitter DM
N Y Univ Law Rev; 2001 Dec; 76(6):1623-91. PubMed ID: 12741387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Analyzing the USPTO's revised utility guidelines. United States Patent and Trademark Office.
Kowalski TJ
Nat Biotechnol; 2000 Mar; 18(3):349-50. PubMed ID: 10700156
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. US court case to define EST patentability.
Lawrence S
Nat Biotechnol; 2005 May; 23(5):513. PubMed ID: 15877055
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. European patents. Tough stance on stem cell, DNA claims.
Vogel G
Science; 2002 Aug; 297(5582):754-5. PubMed ID: 12161624
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Intellectual property. NIH roils academe with advice on licensing DNA patents.
Malakoff D
Science; 2004 Mar; 303(5665):1757-8. PubMed ID: 15031474
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
