공서양속에 반하는 발명에 대한 미국 특허제도에 관한 소고 - 유럽 특허제도와의 비교를 중심으로 - = A Review of Inventions Contrary to Public Order or Morality under US Patent Law: Comparison with EU Patent Law

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Unlike other countries expressly stipulating the morality provision in their patent law, the US. does not have such provision in its patent law. However, it does have so-called the ‘Moral Utility Doctrine’, which was judicially established by the courts a long time ago and has been observed since then. The ‘Moral Utility Doctrine’, as a matter of law, serves as the morality provision appeared in other jurisdictions by putting limitations on patent protection for inventions contrary to public order or morality. The US Patent Office has also abided by such doctrine. Therefore, although there is no explicit provision, it can be said that the acquisition of a patent for inventions contrary to public order or morality is restricted under US patent law. While inventions contrary to public order or morality are treated as one of the exceptions to patentability under EU patent law, they are treated as inventions which do not meet the patentability requirements under US patent law. In addition, the scope of inventions contrary to public order or morality under US patent law is relatively very limited compared to that of their counterparts under EU patent law, which makes a significant difference in operation. This eventually leads to the difference in whether the acquisition of a patent for inventions contrary to public order or morality can be restricted or invalidated under public policy considerations. The US patent system for inventions contrary to public order or morality is very ineffective, especially as an institutional mechanism that restricts the patenting of biotechnological inventions causing social controversies and bioethics issues. As a result, it shows an essential difference from the EU patent system in that there is little room for public policy considerations in the patent examination for inventions in the biotechnology field.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 김형건, "인간 배아줄기세포 연구 기반 조성을 위한 법제 연구" 한국법제연구원 2014
• 2 김형건, "유전자 관련 발명의 특허적격성에 관한 최근 동향: 미국 연방대법원의 Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. 판결의 의미" 한국법제연구원 (46) : 407-435, 2014
• 3 박준석, "미국 특허법상 발명의 개념 -자연법칙의 이용성을 다룬 최신 판례들이 주는 시사점-" 한국지식재산학회 (41) : 89-136, 2013
• 4 박인회, "WARF 사건과 줄기세포 특허" 생명의료법연구소 1 (1): 51-63, 2007
• 5 Eileen McDermott, "USPTO Backs WARF Stem Cell Patents"
• 6 Jerzy Koopman, "The Patentability of Transgenic Animals in the United States of America and the European Union: A Proposal for Harmonization" 13 : 103-, 2002
• 7 Seán M. Coughlin, "The Newman Application and the USPTO’s Unnecessary Response: Patentability of Humans and Human Embryos" 5 : 90-, 2006
• 8 Yvonne Cripps, "The Art and Science of Genetic Modification: Re-Engineering Patent Law and Constitutional Orthodoxies" 11 : 1-, 2004
• 9 USPTO, "Patent Help – Getting Started – Other"
• 10 Margo A. Bagley, "Patent First, Ask Questions Later: Morality and Biotechnology In Patent Law" 45 : 469-, 2003
• 11 Laura A. Keay, "Morality’s Move within U.S. Patent Law: From Moral Utility to Subject Matter" 40 : 409-, 2012
• 12 Julien Crockett, "Morality: An Important Consideration at the Patent Office" 108 : 267-, 2020
• 13 Shannon M. Patrick, "Can We Learn to Incentivize Morality?: A Discussion of Biotechnology on an International Level" 34 : 859-, 2020
• 14 DONALD S. CHISUM, "CHISUM ON PATENTS" LEXISNEXIS 2015
• 15 Hannah M. Mosby, "Biotechnology’s Great Divide: Strengthening the Relationship Between Patent Law and Bioethics in the Age of CRISPR-Cas9" 19 : 565-, 2018
• 16 WIPO Magazine, "Bioethics and Patent Law: The Relaxin Case"
• 17 WIPO Magazine, "Bioethics and Patent Law: The Case of the Oncomouse"
• 18 MAUREEN O’SULLIVAN, "BIOTECHNOLOGY, PATENTS AND MORALITY: A DELIBERATIVE AND PARTICIPATORY PARADIGM FOR REFORM" ROUTLEDGE 2020