I think the fears that this will stifle innovation are greatly exaggerated. In fact, this patent was stifling innovation. Because of the expense, we have tested far fewer patients than we could have for BRCA1&#x2F;2 mutations, and there thus remain many mutations of unknown significance that can only be resolved with more detailed clinical annotation from testing many more people. It&#x27;s a classic case of a patent hampering the usefulness of an invention, so that someone can make money.<p>Myriad really were relentless opportunists with very well fed lawyers. The idea of a patent on a gene is completely nonsensical to anybody working in genomics these days. I can pay $1000 and sequence all 3 billion base pairs of my DNA. Using open source software and publicly available databases funded by governments and charities I can analyse my own DNA. What role does a gene patent have in any of this? What if I discover that I have an unreported variant in the patented gene? Can I now patent my own version of the gene, and charge my offspring a license fee for reproducing this gene each time one of their cells divide? Do they pay extra if they are homozygous?<p>Soul-destroying patent disputes have become a feature of the life sciences, it drives me mad. The story is always the same. A scientist performing research in a seemingly unimpressive field discovers something interesting. They generously publish their rough results because that&#x27;s how science works. Then someone else comes along and refines it a bit before slapping a patent on it, because nobody else has yet. 20 years of legal battles ensue. Companies are still fighting over the PCR patents for example, even AFTER the patents have expired [1].  Now it looks like the same crap is going to transpire with CRISPR. The funny thing about these cases is that most of the research and innovation happens at the beginning, before the patents are even in operation, again questioning the notion that patents foster innovation.<p>As has been pointed out many times before, it is rare for a biotech&#x2F;life sciences company to generate the kind of profit that permits them to do blue sky research. Most of that happens from government funded work. Big pharma doesn&#x27;t really count, it costs them too much to develop each drug. They certainly don&#x27;t have anything akin to Bell Labs, Xerox PARC or Google X.<p>Anyway, Myriad actually doesn&#x27;t have any products any more. All the extremely simple tests they do can be run by anyone. They offer a whole lot of &#x27;services&#x27; like genetic counselling and patient education, but that&#x27;s all to create a veneer of legitimacy and hide the fact they are patent trolls. I feel sorry for their scientists trying to do research in this environment.<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Polymerase_chain_reaction#Patent_disputes" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Polymerase_chain_reaction#Paten...</a>