1.
Regen Med
; 6(6 Suppl): 85-7, 2011 Nov.
Article
in English
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-21999267
ABSTRACT
On 10 March 2011, the Advocate General of the Court of Justice for the European Union issued an Opinion, which essentially recommended that certain inventions related to human embryonic stem cells should not be patentable. Since the publication of the Opinion, the case (Brüstle v. Greenpeace Case C-34/10) has generated a lot of commentary, including numerous articles and discussion in the UK parliment. This article will seek to summarize the case and discuss its practical ramifications.
Subject(s)
European Union , Legislation, Medical , Patents as Topic , Stem Cell Research/legislation & jurisprudence , Cell Culture Techniques/methods , Expert Testimony , Humans , Internationality/legislation & jurisprudence , Jurisprudence , Legislation, Medical/trends , Nervous System Diseases/therapy , Regenerative Medicine/legislation & jurisprudence , Regenerative Medicine/methods , Stem Cell Research/ethics
2.
Regen Med
; 6(3): 273-5, 2011 May.
Article
in English
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-21548729
3.
Regen Med
; 5(5): 687-90, 2010 Sep.
Article
in English
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-20868323
