Patent granted for work done by disgraced Hwang Woo-suk team

by Bob Yirka report

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has granted a patent to Hwang Woo-suk for the technology behind the controversial work he and his team did a decade ago—at the time it was announced that the team had succeeded in cloning a human embryo and had even created a stem cell line to "prove" it. Shortly thereafter, however, the work by the team was discredited. The granting of a patent to the team does not suggest that the work done was in fact successful, but it has set off a round of criticism in the scientific community about the rubber-stamping of patents and the impact that it can have.

Hwang had his colleagues received international acclaim after they published a paper in the journal Science, describing their work—government officials in his home country of South Korea, fawned over him, describing him as a national hero. Unfortunately, it wasn't long before other scientists began finding problems with the work, and over time, it was found that Hwang and his team had faked their findings. Hwang was fired and prosecuted for misusing funds, though he still insists that the work he and his team did was real. Today, he heads an independent laboratory looking into cloning animals—the government has banned him from working on human cloning.

Hwang applied for patents on the work done by his team in countries across the globe, they've been granted in Australia, and Canada, and now the United States. The value of the , however, is still debatable, as a patent on technology that doesn't work is generally considered to be worthless. Still, the issuing of a patent for work that is known to be fraudulent has rankled many in the science and technology fields. The granting of a patent doesn't give any credence to scientific work, of course, but it does, apparently, offer some degree of respectability—or at least the perception of it.

Representatives for USPTO have acknowledged that they have known all along about the fraud perpetuated by the research team, but offer a reminder that the still operates on the honor code—the office could not possibly verify that every patent it grants produces the outcome its maker claims. All that is required is that the application fulfills the requirements of the patent application process—Hwang and his team did just that and thus the patent was granted.

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Apple risks hefty fee in Germany patent trial

Feb 05, 2014

Apple is caught up in a new patent battle in Germany, risking a 1.5-billion-euro fine at a trial over the iPhone's emergency phone-dialling feature, the regional court of Mannheim said on Wednesday.

Argonne battery technology confirmed by US Patent Office

Jan 30, 2014

The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Argonne National Laboratory is pleased to announce that after a careful reexamination of the relevant prior patents and publications, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ...

Silicon Valley patent office shelved

Sep 01, 2013

Silicon Valley's high tech firms are fighting what they consider a deeply personal federal cut this summer that shelves a planned patent office in this innovation-fueled region.

Recommended for you

Key element of CPR missing from guidelines

17 hours ago

Removing the head tilt/chin lift component of rescue breaths from the latest cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) guidelines could be a mistake, according to Queen's University professor Anthony Ho.

Burnout impacts transplant surgeons (w/ Video)

Jul 28, 2014

Despite saving thousands of lives yearly, nearly half of organ transplant surgeons report a low sense of personal accomplishment and 40% feel emotionally exhausted, according to a new national study on transplant surgeon ...

User comments