Especially, the “moral exclusion” conditions in Article six of the “European Council Directives on the legal safeguard for inventions of biotechnological” has resulted in much ambiguity in this field.
This research essay analyses the EU patent system as applicable to biotechnological inventions and especially stem cell research concerning with the overlapping of EU , EPC (European Patent Commission), national and international law regimes on the exclusion of patents in a morally contested and fragmented field. Further, this research also analyses the legal extent of Article 6, which is considered to be crucial for the fostering of investment and research in Europe while making sure that such research is carried over with obvious ethical limits, which try to tackle the apprehensions of society.
In case of injection of human somatic cell nucleus into rabbit eggs which is also known as an inter-species somatic cell nuclear transfer and Article 6 specify that this interspecies nuclear and somatic transfer is not patentable. The grant of patents in Europe connected with stem cells has been sluggish due to ethical prohibition introduced into the “European Biotechnology Directive of 1998”. Thus, “Article Six of the European Biotechnology Directive “needs the prohibition on the grant of patents to inventions that were opposing to order of morality or public order. Article 6 specifically denies patents to the following:
It is desirable to have ethical exclusion where withholding a patent could definitely handicap the EU nations in the development stem cell medication. Human clone exclusion in EU may hamper the usage of the stem cell line to treat patients. This is like banning cameras as it could be employed in the making of obscene pictures. If somebody wants to discover a method for employing embryos to generate a viable merchandise to cure cancer, this may be considered as commercialisation.