Legal Nature and Classification of Biotechnology Objects in Private Law
Abstract views: 13
/ 
PDF downloads: 8
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59022/ijlp.362Keywords:
Biotechnology Objects, Civil Law Regulation, Intellectual Property Protection, Patent Law, Biological Materials, Genetic Engineering, Bioethics Frameworks, Legal Classification SystemsAbstract
This comprehensive study examines biotechnology objects as fundamental subjects of contemporary private (civil) law relations, analyzing their distinctive characteristics, comprehensive classification systems, and evolving legal frameworks across multiple jurisdictions. The research employs comparative legal analysis methodology to investigate the complex dialectical relationship between natural and artificial elements inherent in biotechnology objects, their unique reproducibility capabilities, and the multifaceted risk factors they present to legal systems worldwide. The study systematically reveals that biotechnology objects constitute an exceptionally complex legal category requiring highly specialized jurisprudential approaches due to their inherent dual nature, which fundamentally combines natural biological materials with sophisticated technological intervention processes. The comprehensive classification framework developed encompasses three primary categories: biological materials, including genetic sequences and cellular preparations; biotechnological processes, encompassing genetic engineering methodologies; and biotechnological products, including pharmaceutical preparations and diagnostic systems, each requiring distinct intellectual property protection mechanisms and regulatory oversight approaches.
References
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2013).
Bergin, L. C. (2024). The approval and substitutability of biosimilars: Potential impact on use and competition. Food and Drug Law Institute, 78(3), 234-267.
Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, Article 1009 (2020).
Costa, S. (2024). Applications of food biotechnology in sustainable food production. Journal of Food Science and Nutrition, 7(3), 236-248.
Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 (1980).
Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions. (1998). Official Journal of the European Union, L 213, 13-21.
Kathage, J., & Qaim, M. (2012). Economic impacts and impact dynamics of Bt cotton in India, 2006-2008. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(29), 11652-11656. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1203647109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1203647109
MoloLamken. (2025). What rights do I get by obtaining a patent for my invention? https://www.mololamken.com/knowledge-what-rights-do-i-get-by-obtaining
Moore v. Regents of the University of California, 51 Cal. 3d 120, 793 P.2d 479 (1990).
Ogbogu, U. (2017). What is a new object? Case studies of classification problems and practices at the intersection of law and biotechnology. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3073435 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3073435
Potter Clarkson. (2024). Protecting & leveraging trade secrets in biotech. https://www.potterclarkson.com/insights/confidentiality-as-currency-protecting-and-leveraging-trade-secrets-in-biotech/
PubMed. (2023). The CRISPR Cas patent files, part 1: Cas9. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37984590
Schneider, T., & Hengen, P. N. (2004). Molecular computing elements, gates and flip-flops. U.S. Patent No. 6,774,222. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Singh, K. K. (2015). Biotechnology and intellectual property rights: Legal and social implications. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2059-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2059-6
Staunton, C., Slokenberga, S., & Mascalzoni, D. (2022). Appropriate safeguards and Article 89 of the GDPR: Considerations for biobank, databank and genetic research. Frontiers in Genetics, 13, 719317. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2022.719317 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2022.719317
Traxler, G., Godoy-Avila, S., Falck-Zepeda, J., & Espinoza-Arellano, J. (2001). Transgenic cotton in Mexico. ISAAA Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Sardor Mamanazarov
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
