Patents are generally considered to be very positive things. In the case of genetic patenting, it is the scope and number of claims that has generated controversy. The investment of resources is encouraged by providing a monopoly to the inventor and prohibiting competitors from making, using, or selling the invention without a license. Wasteful duplication of effort is prevented. Research is forced into new, unexplored areas.
Secrecy is reduced and all researchers are ensured access to the new invention.
Patents could impede the development of diagnostics and therapeutics by third parties because of the costs associated with using patented research data. Because patent applications remain secret until granted, companies may work on developing a product only to find that new patents have been granted along the way, with unexpected licensing costs and possible infringement penalties. Costs increase not only for paying for patent licensing but also for determining what patents apply and who has rights to downstream products. Private biotechs who own certain patents can monopolize certain gene test markets. Prior to 1980, life forms were considered a part of nature and were not patentable.