5 thoughts on “COVID-19 Patents

  1. 2

    Only a few are directed to COVID. Only 21 recite COVID in a claim. 10,987,329 is pure snake oil, at the same level of BS that you see on Facebook. Why is the PTO still falling for junk like “therapeutically effective dose” when it is clear that such a thing is clearly not known?

  2. 1

    What would be relevant to the current international political debate is if any of these 148 patents so far even mentioning COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 relate to any currently available vaccines?

    1. 1.1

      I have a Derwent alert set us that informs me every time a patent issues with “SARS” or “COVID” in the claims or title. So far, none of these grants concern a vaccine. The largest category so far are test technologies. The next largest concern algorithms that purport to predict something COVID-related (where the next outbreak is likely to emerge, how a given patient’s disease is likely to progress, etc). The smallest category so far is putative therapies (mostly second medical use claims for existing FDA-approved drugs, but also some novel herbal blends).

      The claims directed to SARS-CoV2 vaccines are still being examined, but none have yet granted. Of course, as previously noted, all the vaccines approved in the U.S. are covered by one or more granted patents directed to the novel vaccine platforms.

      1. 1.1.1


        As apparently very much necessary, one must be reminded (yet again) that the stakes in play upon the world stage are considerably MORE than merely a patent waiver and the NON-patent IP informs that very “platform” that Greg notes.

        Adding yet another wrinkle (and — again — noting that this waiver is NOT limited to being a “patent waiver”), here is the Pontiff weighing in:

        link to nypost.com

        The words “moral imperative” raise the stakes, and those only thinking, “meh, patent only” are really setting themselves up for a rude awakening.

Comments are closed.