https://grain.org/e/1875

Ayahuasca patent cancelled

by GRAIN | 5 Nov 1999
TITLE: U.S. Patent Office Cancels Patent on Sacred Ayahuasca Plant AUTHOR: Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) PUBLICATION: CIEL Press Release DATE: 4 November 1999

For Immediate Release Thursday, November 4, 1999

U.S. PATENT OFFICE ADMITS ERROR, CANCELS PATENT ON SACRED AYAHUASCA PLANT

Indigenous Leaders, Legal Experts Hail Decision to Cancel Flawed

Patent on Sacred Plant from the Amazon, But Call for Reforms to Prevent Future Abuses

Washington, D.C. - Indigenous peoples from nine South American countries won a precedent-setting victory yesterday, as the U.S. Patent

and Trademark Office (PTO) canceled the patent issued to a U.S. citizen

for the ayahuasca vine.

The plant, Banisteriopsis caapi, is native to the Amazonian rainforest.

Thousands of indigenous people of the region use it in sacred religious

and healing ceremonies, as part of their traditional religions.

The PTO's decision came in response to a request for reexamination of

the patent filed with the PTO in March by the Coordinating Body for the

Indigenous Organizations of the Amazon Basin (COICA), the Coalition for

Amazonian Peoples and Their Environment, and lawyers at the Center for

International Environmental Law (CIEL).

Our Shamans and Elders were greatly troubled by this patent. Now they are celebrating. This is an historic day for indigenous peoples everywhere, says Antonio Jacanamijoy, General Coordinator of COICA.

According to David Rothschild, director of the Amazon Coalition, Given that ayahuasca is used in sacred indigenous ceremonies throughout the

Amazon, this patent never should have been issued in the first place.

The PTO based its rejection of the patent on the fact that publications

describing Banisteriopsis caapi were known and available prior to the filing of the patent application. According to patent law, no invention can be patented if described in printed publications more than

one year prior to the date of the patent application. William Anderson,

director of the University of Michigan Herbarium, agreed that the PTO

needs to improve its procedures for researching applications.

CIEL lawyer David Downes noted that while we are pleased that the PTO has cancelled this flawed patent, we are concerned that the PTO still

has not dealt with the flaws in its policies that made it possible for

someone to patent this plant in the first place. He explained that

the PTO needs to change its rules to prevent future patent claims based on the traditional knowledge and use of a plant by indigenous peoples. He also argued that the PTO should face the issue head-on of whether it is ethical for patent applicants to claim private rights

over a plant or knowledge that is sacred to a cultural or ethnic group.

In a separate proceeding at the PTO, the three groups have called for

changes in PTO rules. They argue that the PTO should require that patent applicants identify all biological resources and traditional

knowledge that they used in developing the claimed invention.

Applicants should also disclose the geographical origin, and provide

evidence that the source country and indigenous community consented to

its use.

Contacts: Kris Genovese, CIEL (1-202) 785-8700 David Rothschild, Amazon Coalition (1-202) 785-3334

Author: GRAIN