And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 14:44:36 -0800 (PST) From: David Downes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Challenge Filed to the Ayahuasca Patent Dear Friends and Colleagues, I thought you might be interested to know that on March 30, the Center for International Environmental Law, the Coordinating Body of Indigenous Organizations of the Amazon Basin, and the Coalition for Amazonian Peoples and Their Environment filed a request with the United States Patent and Trademark Office seeking the cancellation of a patent on the "ayahuasca" plant. This patent, Plant Patent No. 5,751, was issued to Loren Miller on June 17, 1986. It claims rights over a supposed variety of B. caapi, which Mr. Miller dubbed "Da Vine." Shamans of many indigenous tribes of the Amazon collect the plant - which has the scientific name Banisteriopsis caapi - and process it with other rainforest plants, according to traditional techniques, to produce a ceremonial drink -"ayahuasca," also called "yag�". The shamans (traditional healers and religious leaders) use ayahuasca in religious and healing ceremonies to heal the sick, meet with spirits, and divine the future. According to tradition, ayahuasca is prepared and administered only under the guidance of a shaman. We made two submissions to the PTO. The request for reexamination seeks cancellation of this particular patent. In a letter to the Commissioner, we call for a more general review of the treatment of traditional knowledge and biological diversity under United States patent laws. As we explained in our request to the PTO, the ayahuasca patent is utterly flawed. Patents are supposed to reward those who add something to the world's store of useful knowledge. In exchange for this contribution, the inventor receives an exclusive right over the use and sale of the invention. Thus, a person can patent a plant under US law if it is a new and distinct variety. The original idea was to reward people like fruit growers who invest in developing new varieties of apples or other crops. The patent in this case is completely inconsistent with the patent law's original goals. This patent claims the plant is novel because the patent owner identified its medicinal qualities. But indigenous peoples have known the plant's medicinal qualities for many generations. The patent claims that the plant is distinct because it has different colored flowers from other plants of the species (Banisteriopsis caapi). But according to a leading expert, this plant's flowers are typical of the species. Equally important, this patent claims as private property something that is a sacred to the religions of the indigenous peoples of the Amazon. In their cultures, this sacred plant is something to be shared, respected and used with caution. It is not something to be privatized, bought or sold. While this is an important case, it is not an isolated one. The ayahuasca patent is a symptom of broader problems. When people can claim as their own inventions naturally occurring plants and ancient knowledge, we worry that our patent law system has lost sight of its original goals of supporting innovation. When an individual can claim as private property something that is the sacred heritage of dozens of cultures and thousands of people, we are concerned that private property has expanded too far into the public domain. The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity, signed by over 170 countries, recognizes that the genetic and chemical information found in biological diversity is a valuable natural resource that is a heritage of the countries and communities where it is found. Much of the world's biological diversity is found in the territories of indigenous peoples, where they have maintained and conserved it through their traditional systems of stewardship of land and natural resources. As you know, concerns are growing that this biological diversity, like traditional knowledge, is being appropriated as a resource for patented technologies, without consent or adequate compensation. These trends have important implications not only for indigenous peoples but for the public at large. In an unprecedent event, a group of shamans - traditional caretakers of knowledge in their culture - came all the way from the Amazon rainforest to Arlington, Virginia, where they made their request to the office of the PTO. Now we await the response of the PTO - an important authority in the United States system of managing knowledge. We hope that today's events will start a dialogue through which the PTO will reassess the treatment of biological diversity and cultural and moral values under the patent law, and consult with the public on possible reforms. If you would like more information, please let me know. Available documents include a two page fact sheet on the legal issues, a three page letter to the PTO, and the formal request for reexamination, which is about 30 pages long, all in MS Word format. Best regards, David Downes, Senior Attorney Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) 1367 Connecticut Ave., N.W., Ste. 300 Washington, D.C. 20036 U.S.A. Tel: +1 (202) 785-8700 Fax: +1 (202) 785-8701 E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.econet.apc.org/ciel/ &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit) Unenh onhwa' Awayaton http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/ &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
