Actually I disagree. The court has been surprisingly good in patent cases at least since Bilsky. As recently as last term, the Supreme Court ruled that interpretations of drug test results couldn't be patented (that works heavily against Myriad in the other genetic case before the court btw).
I am pretty optimistic that we will see a ruling in these two cases saying:
1. Yes, you can patent transgenic organisms, but the patent is exhausted after first sale, and
2. You can't patent genes in the abstract or what it means for a gene to be present.
I am pretty optimistic that we will see a ruling in these two cases saying:
1. Yes, you can patent transgenic organisms, but the patent is exhausted after first sale, and
2. You can't patent genes in the abstract or what it means for a gene to be present.