From patent law to regulation: the ontological gerrymandering of biotechnology

Abstract

Biotechnology is (ontologically speaking) many things. US patent law's understanding of ‘the natural’ has shrunk over the decades to allow the patenting of artefacts – such as organisms, cell lines, chemical compounds, and cDNA – that would previously have been unpatentable. However, when attempting to garner public support or minimise regulatory hurdles, proponents of biotechnology emphasise how these artefacts are no different from their un-engineered counterparts – that they are, in a word, natural. Some political implications of this ontological gerrymandering are discussed by focusing on instances of resistance, where previously hidden assemblages and networks (which proponents of biotechnology do not want the public to see) are being made visible.

Notes

1. I thank a referee for bringing this to my attention.

2. According to Latour, an immutable mobile is something that moves around while still holding its shape. The notion of the immutable mobile is useful when thinking about long-distance control via the work that goes into moving scientific facts (and artefacts) around without losing their apparent universality.