Degree Type

Thesis

Date of Award

2007

Degree Name

Master of Arts

Department

History

First Advisor

Christopher Curtis

Second Advisor

Amy Bix

Third Advisor

Sara Gregg

Abstract

In 1980, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case of Diamond v. Chakrabarty that living material was in the category of patentable subject matter, provided that the living material was a product of human invention as opposed to a product of nature. The fact that the material was living or inanimate was held to be irrelevant to the issue of eligibility for a patent. This ruling was the centerpiece in a series of events that combined to secure the status of animate material as private property. These events fundamentally changed the nature of scientific research in the academic community and the relationship between the university and the private market. These events also had a chilling effect on the pubic debate over the safety, ethics, and morality of commercializing biological material. As a result, the citizens of the United States have never fully dealt with this complex ethical issue except from a purely economic perspective.

DOI

https://doi.org/10.31274/rtd-180813-16169

Publisher

Digital Repository @ Iowa State University, http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/

Copyright Owner

Kevin F. Howe

Language

en

Proquest ID

AAI1446032

OCLC Number

180853458

ISBN

9780549141518

File Format

application/pdf

File Size

98 pages

Share

COinS