生物医学中的商业秘密

Robin C. Feldman
{"title":"生物医学中的商业秘密","authors":"Robin C. Feldman","doi":"10.52214/stlr.v24i1.10455","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Can something be both open and secret? That is the conundrum facing society as trade secret rights chafe against patent rights in cutting-edge, biologic medicine. The conflict is unsurprising. Trade secret has emerged as a relatively late bloomer among the family of intellectual property rights and only recently has begun to establish the boundaries of its own space, a process in which it will inevitably knock against other intellectual property doctrines already occupying their own domains. Nor is it surprising that the clash would arise in a fast-moving area of medical science. From insulin products, to cancer treatments, to mRNA vaccines, companies are staking the health of their  companies on biologics.\nThere is a dearth of legal literature on the topic of trade secrets in the biologic space and almost nothing regarding how trade secrets interact with the patent system in that domain. These scientific and legal areas are sufficiently complex that even the most intrepid scholars fear to tread. This article explains in detailed and accessible language how the systems are working together to the detriment of society.\nTo address the problem, this article argues that a company receiving a patent on a drug product should be required to disclose the full range of trade secrets necessary to make that drug. As the descriptions below will explain, patent applicants are able to satisfy the patent requirement of providing sufficient disclosure that “one skilled in the art can make and use” the invention, without actually providing the information to do so. The surrounding regulatory systems intended to facilitate sharing of clinical trial data suffer the same problem.\nAs is frequently said in biologics, “the process is the product.” In other words, the only way to define something derived from elements of living organisms is by describing the process of producing it. Thus, lack of process information is particularly problematic with biologics. Being faithful to the theoretical underpinnings of the intellectual property regimes requires a resolution of this problem and the establishment of a more effective boundary line between trade secrets and patents for biologic medicine.","PeriodicalId":87208,"journal":{"name":"The Columbia science and technology law review","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trade Secrets in Biologic Medicine\",\"authors\":\"Robin C. Feldman\",\"doi\":\"10.52214/stlr.v24i1.10455\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Can something be both open and secret? That is the conundrum facing society as trade secret rights chafe against patent rights in cutting-edge, biologic medicine. The conflict is unsurprising. Trade secret has emerged as a relatively late bloomer among the family of intellectual property rights and only recently has begun to establish the boundaries of its own space, a process in which it will inevitably knock against other intellectual property doctrines already occupying their own domains. Nor is it surprising that the clash would arise in a fast-moving area of medical science. From insulin products, to cancer treatments, to mRNA vaccines, companies are staking the health of their  companies on biologics.\\nThere is a dearth of legal literature on the topic of trade secrets in the biologic space and almost nothing regarding how trade secrets interact with the patent system in that domain. These scientific and legal areas are sufficiently complex that even the most intrepid scholars fear to tread. This article explains in detailed and accessible language how the systems are working together to the detriment of society.\\nTo address the problem, this article argues that a company receiving a patent on a drug product should be required to disclose the full range of trade secrets necessary to make that drug. As the descriptions below will explain, patent applicants are able to satisfy the patent requirement of providing sufficient disclosure that “one skilled in the art can make and use” the invention, without actually providing the information to do so. The surrounding regulatory systems intended to facilitate sharing of clinical trial data suffer the same problem.\\nAs is frequently said in biologics, “the process is the product.” In other words, the only way to define something derived from elements of living organisms is by describing the process of producing it. Thus, lack of process information is particularly problematic with biologics. Being faithful to the theoretical underpinnings of the intellectual property regimes requires a resolution of this problem and the establishment of a more effective boundary line between trade secrets and patents for biologic medicine.\",\"PeriodicalId\":87208,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Columbia science and technology law review\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Columbia science and technology law review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52214/stlr.v24i1.10455\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Columbia science and technology law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52214/stlr.v24i1.10455","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

一件事可以既公开又秘密吗?这是社会面临的难题,因为商业秘密权与尖端生物医药的专利权发生了摩擦。这种冲突并不令人意外。商业秘密在知识产权家族中出现得相对较晚,直到最近才开始建立自己的空间边界,在这个过程中,它将不可避免地与已经占据自己领域的其他知识产权理论发生冲突。这场冲突出现在一个快速发展的医学科学领域也不足为奇。从胰岛素产品,到癌症治疗,再到mRNA疫苗,公司正在把公司的健康押在生物制剂上。关于生物领域商业秘密的法律文献很少,关于商业秘密如何与该领域的专利制度相互作用的法律文献几乎没有。这些科学和法律领域非常复杂,即使是最勇敢的学者也不敢涉足。这篇文章用通俗易懂的语言详细解释了这些系统是如何共同对社会造成损害的。为了解决这个问题,本文认为,应该要求获得药品专利的公司披露制造该药品所需的全部商业秘密。正如下面的描述将解释的那样,专利申请人能够满足提供“本领域技术人员可以制造和使用”该发明的充分披露的专利要求,而无需实际提供这样做的信息。旨在促进临床试验数据共享的相关监管系统也面临同样的问题。正如生物制剂中经常说的那样,“过程即产品”。换句话说,定义从生物体元素衍生出来的东西的唯一方法是描述生产它的过程。因此,缺乏工艺信息是生物制剂的一个特别大的问题。要忠实于知识产权制度的理论基础,就需要解决这一问题,并在商业秘密和生物医药专利之间建立更有效的界限。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Trade Secrets in Biologic Medicine
Can something be both open and secret? That is the conundrum facing society as trade secret rights chafe against patent rights in cutting-edge, biologic medicine. The conflict is unsurprising. Trade secret has emerged as a relatively late bloomer among the family of intellectual property rights and only recently has begun to establish the boundaries of its own space, a process in which it will inevitably knock against other intellectual property doctrines already occupying their own domains. Nor is it surprising that the clash would arise in a fast-moving area of medical science. From insulin products, to cancer treatments, to mRNA vaccines, companies are staking the health of their  companies on biologics. There is a dearth of legal literature on the topic of trade secrets in the biologic space and almost nothing regarding how trade secrets interact with the patent system in that domain. These scientific and legal areas are sufficiently complex that even the most intrepid scholars fear to tread. This article explains in detailed and accessible language how the systems are working together to the detriment of society. To address the problem, this article argues that a company receiving a patent on a drug product should be required to disclose the full range of trade secrets necessary to make that drug. As the descriptions below will explain, patent applicants are able to satisfy the patent requirement of providing sufficient disclosure that “one skilled in the art can make and use” the invention, without actually providing the information to do so. The surrounding regulatory systems intended to facilitate sharing of clinical trial data suffer the same problem. As is frequently said in biologics, “the process is the product.” In other words, the only way to define something derived from elements of living organisms is by describing the process of producing it. Thus, lack of process information is particularly problematic with biologics. Being faithful to the theoretical underpinnings of the intellectual property regimes requires a resolution of this problem and the establishment of a more effective boundary line between trade secrets and patents for biologic medicine.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信