How do I know that GMO patents are not creating a monopoly?

Expert response from Hans Sauer

Deputy General Counsel for Intellectual Property for the Biotechnology Industry Organization

Wednesday, 11/08/2017 18:16

The words “patent” and “monopoly” are often used interchangeably, but legally and practically they are two different things. A monopoly exists, for example, when there is only one source for a commodity product, and no alternative competing products to which purchasers could turn to instead. On the other hand, when there is lively competition between alternative products we don’t normally speak of monopolies. Patented products often compete against other patented products, or against unpatented products. This is because a patent doesn’t say anything about competition in the relevant market – it only gives its owner the right to exclude others from making, using or selling what is claimed in the patent. The relationship between patents and competition can be observed in many industries. For example, each laptop sold on the market today includes many patented inventions, and yet we still see a large number of competing laptop manufacturers selling their products.  

GMOs are usually developed to mitigate the effects of challenges like drought, pests, disease and pollution. The tools available to companies looking to solve these problems are numerous, and not all of them rely on genetic modification. Thus, in the case of a patent on a GMO, multiple seed producers may choose to combine the same GMO trait (under license from the patent owner) with their own proprietary seed technology and germplasm to produce distinct seed products with different benefits and properties. This creates competition and choices for growers.

Patents are important to protect the large investment of time and resources necessary to develop GMOs. GMOs by their nature are living and are usually capable of reproduction, thereby lending themselves to being readily copied by competitors. By having patents on GMOs, innovators are more likely to invest in developing these technologies without the fear that their competitors will copy the technology and prevent the innovator from recouping its investment. Nonetheless, patents are limited in time and scope, and as explained above, do not by themselves prevent competition.