ABSTRACT
Genomics patents are controversial on religious, ethical, legal, and economic grounds. An economic approach is desirable for valuing the patent system generally, and genomics patents in particular, in terms of its stated constitutional objective, which is to 'promote progress'. Several types of criticisms and warnings have been issued regarding the suitability of genomics inventions for patent protection; here these are evaluated in the context of more general concerns about the efficacy of the patent system. As with the patent system more generally, it is difficult to specify an alternative mechanism for producing inventions that has attributes (such as decentralized resource allocation, speed of therapeutic discovery, and financing by beneficiaries) that are predictable enough to serve as a benchmark against which to judge the current regime, which is dominated by genomics patents. The current patent regime can be expected to produce commercializable therapies reasonably reliably, while many proposed alternatives hearken back to a regime that did not produce commercializable therapies with as great speed or variety. Therefore, the onus appears to lie on the critics to create a model with the desirable properties of the patent system, but with fewer of its acknowledged weaknesses, such as 'monopoly' pricing and 'patent thickets'.
