midwifetoad
Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008
|
http://news.yahoo.com/high-co....77.html
| Quote | In 2010, a federal judge ruled that genes cannot be patented. U.S. District Judge Robert Sweet said he invalidated the patents because DNA's existence in an isolated form does not alter the fundamental quality of DNA as it exists in the body nor the information it encodes.
But last year, a divided panel of the federal appeals court in Washington that handles patent cases reversed Sweet's ruling. The appeals court said genes can be patented because the isolated DNA has a "markedly different chemical structure" from DNA within the body.
The Supreme Court threw out that decision, and sent the case back to the lower courts for rehearing. The high court said it sent the case back for rehearing because of its decision in another case last week saying that the laws of nature are unpatentable. |
Edited by midwifetoad on Mar. 28 2012,08:57
--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.
|
