Then vs. Now comparison · thenVsNow/tvn-026

Indigenous Knowledge vs. Scientific Patent Law

Education, not medical advice. Drafts and study material from an independent research library. Citations on this page were checked on Oct 13, 2026; claims in the body text and organizational sources are still under review. What was checked.

Then (1998), The Cosmic Serpent

Indigenous Knowledge vs. Scientific Patent Law

Biology has become an industry guided by a thirst for marketable knowledge rather than ethical or spiritual considerations. The sacred is not for sale, but the pharmaceutical industry is attempting to patent what indigenous communities have known for millennia.
reversed
Since 1998, biopiracy cases have proliferated: US Patent 5,751,559 on ayahuasca was filed and eventually cancelled (2003) after a legal challenge by indigenous groups, but similar cases continue. WIPO's Intergovernmental Committee on Genetic Resources has been negotiating an Indigenous Knowledge treaty for over twenty years with limited progress. As of 2024, the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-Sharing is in force in 138 countries, but enforcement is weak. The psychedelic patent race has accelerated since 2020, with psilocybin developers and other companies filing patents on therapeutic protocols and molecular derivatives, prompting a 'Defensive Patent' movement by researchers at Johns Hopkins.

Sources

  • WIPO, Intergovernmental Committee on GR (2024)
  • Tupper, Global Networks (2009)
  • Olson et al., Trends Pharmacol. Sci. (2022) [Source not found; under review]