Articles

Biobanks on Balance between Private Property and Commons: Patents or Open Data sharing?


Abstract


The circulation and sharing of contents in biobanks is approached with the study of the normative statutes of these institutions, with careful attention to copyright. Such institutions are an organized set of human biological specimens with diagnostic, therapeutic, and research aims. Since the issue is quite new, their statutes are controversial; moreover, the exploitation of new detections is particularly complicated. The ownership of samples (tissues, cells, organs) and the ownership of the biobank as the entity managing the database is crucial in order to determine any rights on researches that can be patented. The sui generic right in Europe states some rights for the database builder, whom allocates economic resources to organize information. However, the main issue of this kind of databases is related to the quality of the patented object: organic and living material. Regarding this fact, there exist stances for privatizing those biological specimens, while the majority consider models of open data sharing as a more suitable way, considering organic samples as “commons”. The latter tendency seems to predominate, protecting the human body and its genome from economical exploitation, although acknowledging some kinds of profits related to the intellectual property.


Keywords


Biobanks; Biology; Copyright; Database; Open data sharing

Full Text:

PDF (Italiano)


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4403/jlis.it-4537

NBN: http://nbn.depositolegale.it/urn%3Anbn%3Ait%3Aunifi-3794

References


Azzini, Sara. “Biobanche consenso e fonti del diritto: un caso di eccezionale di- sordine?” 2010. http://biodiritto.eu/sito/index.php?option=com content& task=view&id=24&Itemid=45. Online.

Cambon-Thomsen, Anne. “Assessing the Impact of Biobanks”. Nature genetics 34. (25-26 2003). A stampa.

De Cupis, Adriano. “I diritti della personalit`a”. Trattato di Diritto Civile e Commerciale. A cura di Antonio Cicu e Francesco Messineo. Milano, 1985. A stampa.

De Robbio, Antonella. “Biobanche e proprietà intellettuale: commons o caveau?” Bibliotime 14. (3 2010). http://didattica.spbo.unibo.it/bibliotime/num-xiii-3/derobbio.htm. Online.

Ferrando, Mantovani. I trapianti e la sperimentazione umana nel diritto italiano e straniero. Padova: CEDAM, 1974. A stampa.

Fliedner, Theodor M. et al. “Cryopreservation of blood mononuclear leukocytes and stem cells suspended in a large fluid volume. A preclinical model of a blood stem cell bank”. Blut 35. (3 1977): 195–202. A stampa.

Gitter, Donna M. “The Challenge of Achieving Open Source of Biobank”. De- partment of Legal Sciences of the University of Trento, Trento. 2010. http: //papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract id=1598400. Online.

Hardin, Garrett. “The Tragedy of the Commons”. Science 162. (1968): 1243– 1248.

http://dieoff.org/page95.htm. Online.

Izzo, Umberto e Roberto Caso. “Propriet`a intellettuale e diritti individuali: il caso Moore vs. University of California”. Universit`a di Trento. Facolt`a di Giurisprudenza, 25 ott. 2010. http://www.unitn.it/ateneo/evento/6979/ proprieta - intellettuale - e - diritti - individuali - il - caso - moore - vs - university - california. Online.

Kazutoshi, Takahashi e Yamanaka Shinya. “Induction of pluripotent stem cells from mouse embryonic and adult fibroblast cultures by defined factors”. Cell 126. (4 2006): 663–676.

http://www.cell.com/abstract/S0092-8674(06) 00976-7. Online.

Macilotti, Matteo et. al. “La disciplina giuridica delle biobanche”. Pathologica 100. (2008): 86–101. http://www.tissuebank.it/publicazioni/Macilotti.pdf. Online.

McHale, J.V. “Regulating genetic databases: some legal and ethical issues”. Med. L. Rev. 12. (2004): 70–96. A stampa.

Ostrom, Elinor. Governing the commons. The evolution of institutions for collective actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. A stampa.

Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri. Comitato Nazionale per la Bioetica. Bio- banche e e ricerca sul materiale biologico umano. Parere del CNB su una raccomandazione del Consiglio d’Europa e su un documento del Comitato Nazionale per la Biosicurezza e le Biotecnologie. 9 giu. 2006. http://www.governo.it/bioetica/testi/Biobanche.pdf. Online.

Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri. Comitato Nazionale per la Biosicurezza e le Biotecnologie. Linee Guida per l’istituzione e l’accreditamento delle biobanche. Rapporto del Gruppo di lavoro. 19 apr. 2006. A stampa.

Qiu, Jane. “Trading on hope”. Nature Biotechnology 27. (2009): 790–792. A stampa.

Stelma, F. F. Regulations European Biobank Maastricht. Dept. Epidemiology, Maastricht University, 2003. A stampa.

Stiglitz, Joseph e John Sulston. “The Case Against Gene Patents. Genetic se- quences are naturally occurring things, not inventions. No company should be allowed to monopolize research on them”. The Wall Street Journal. (16 Apr. 2010). A stampa.

Venturello, Marco. La milza del Signor Moore: una prospettiva in analisi giuri- dica comparativa ed economica. 1997. http://jus.unitn.it/cardozo/review/ property/venturello-1997/milzas.htm. Online.

Vitiello, Giuseppe. “Open access, biblioteche e strategie italiane per i com- mons della conoscenza”. Biblioteche oggi 28. (2 2010).

http://www.bibliotecheoggi.it/content/20100206201.pdf. Online.


Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Refbacks



Copyright (c) 2010 Antonella De Robbio, Antonella Corradi

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Logo Università di FirenzeLogo EUMJLIS.it is a journal of the SAGAS Department, University of Florence, published by EUM, Edizioni Università di Macerata (Italy).

ISSN: 2038-1026

Openaire Logo DOAJ seal