Is it moral to patent life?

Question

Starting with genetically altered seed, such as seed altered by introducing e-coli bacteria to the gene structure of the seed changing the natural gene to a mutated one? Will altering genes eventually move to human gene's, and will they be able to be patented?

Answer 1

This is a very complicated question, but for starters I think one needs to differentiate between patenting a gene and patenting life.

A gene is simply a block of code within DNA that performs a certain function, like building a particular protein. It is very analogous to a block of computer programming. As such, I see nothing morally wrong with patenting a synthetic gene. I say synthetic because you can not patent stuff that already exists in nature; you have to have either made some substantial improvement or alteration to it, or created it from scratch. Also from a legal standpoint, I don't see that holding a patent on a gene in your body gives the holder any claim whatsoever to ownership of "you", which is outlawed anyway (that would constitute slavery).

As for patenting life, again that would have to be a lifeform that does not occur naturally in nature. And while it hasn't happened yet, I think the patenting of any lifeform that could prove its sentience by passing a Turing test should be prohibited. This would, eventually, include intelligent AI's.

There is an excellent book called "Liberation Biology" by Ronald Bailey that has a few chapters exploring this question in greater detail, from both a moral and legal point of view. The rest of the book is a good read also, as it tells of some of the absolutely incredible breakthroughs that are already in the pipeline and in development.

Answer 2

Yes, but the people who do this have really not thought how to police that patenting.