Plant patents: scholars try to teach TIPO a lesson
The Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO) said that plant varieties should be included as patentable subject matter. This has attracted dissent from scholars and local plant and seed associations. They believe that the patenting of plants and seeds would restrict innovation in this area and deal a big blow to Taiwan’s Phalaenopsis orchid industry, which is said to be worth in excess of 10 billion Taiwan new dollars ($345 million).
Under Article 24 of the Patent Act, only non-essential biological methods for plant genes, cells, tissue cultures and plant production are patentable subject matter. Parts of a plant—the fruit and seeds, for example—and a plant in its entirety are not patentable. TIPO intends to provide dual protection for the research and development of plant varieties by granting both patent rights and plant variety rights.
TIPO believes that plant patenting is a common practice, as it is adopted by many jurisdictions, including Japan, Korea, Australia and the US, while relatively few, such as India, Brazil and China, do not allow plant patents. It is also believed that plant patents could benefit biotechnology innovation in Taiwan.
"DISCLOSED PLANT VARIETIES CAN BE CONTINUOUSLY UTILISED FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, AND WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY LATER GRANTED PATENT RIGHTS."
However, scholars argue that Taiwan’s Plant Variety and Plant Seed Act already complies with the plant variety protection requirements under the TRIPS Agreement. Scholars also argue that agricultural researchers do not need patent protection for new breeding, because genetically modified plants are not welcome in the marketplace. This discourages research and development in breeding new plant varieties.
Local plant and seed associations have more concerns. They draw lessons from The Netherlands and claim that granting plant patents will open the marketplace to multinational biotechnology companies that will create problematic ‘patent jungles’ and demand high royalty rates that will harm vulnerable local farmers.
In defending the government’s policy, TIPO held several public hearings to respond to the public’s concerns. It said:
