Joe Miner Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Supreme Court says police can take DNA swabs when you are arrested: http://news.yahoo.co...-141958322.html By a 5-4 vote the court reversed a decision last April by Maryland's highest court that overturned the 2010 conviction and life sentence of Alonzo Jay King for a rape committed seven years earlier.The court, in an opinion written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, handed a victory to the state of Maryland by saying taking of DNA samples was similar to taking fingerprints DNA samples can be taken if police have probable cause to detain a suspect facing charges relating to a serious offense, Kennedy said. Taking a sample using a swab of the cheek is "like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure," Kennedy said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQeVIJ8e_z8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Private enterprise may be able patent human genes soon... So a swab when arrested, no big deal I guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 Private enterprise may be able patent human genes soon... So a swab when arrested, no big deal I guess... Which brings up an interesting legal point: corporations can patent my DNA, thereby owning the rights to it. But according to this ruling, it can be legitimately used to identify me. So a corporation can patent my identifying traits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 (edited) Which brings up an interesting legal point: corporations can patent my DNA, thereby owning the rights to it. But according to this ruling, it can be legitimately used to identify me. So a corporation can patent my identifying traits? Not sure.... I want to read more about it when I get back from vacation. I am sure they only want to patent your good traits, so that shouldn't take to long. Edited June 3, 2013 by B-Large Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 I Think that I have got to agree with Justice Scalia on this one; Court Approves DNA Swabs For Arrestees. Clearly, if we’re going to protect people’s 4th Amendment rights, we need to name more people like Scalia to the Supreme Court. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 (edited) I Think that I have got to agree with Justice Scalia on this one; Court Approves DNA Swabs For Arrestees. Clearly, if we’re going to protect people’s 4th Amendment rights, we need to name more people like Scalia to the Supreme Court. . Wow! Scalia teaming up w/the likes of Ginsburg, Sotomayor, & Kagan... Clearly, if we're going to protect people's 4th Amendments rithts, we need to name more people like Scalia, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, & Kagan to the Supreme Court. Edited June 4, 2013 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 Which brings up an interesting legal point: corporations can patent my DNA, thereby owning the rights to it. But according to this ruling, it can be legitimately used to identify me. So a corporation can patent my identifying traits? Not if they haven't already received a patent on them. Under the AIA, "no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism." Patents granted prior to the AIA becoming effective aren't invalidated, but new ones can't issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 Not if they haven't already received a patent on them. Under the AIA, "no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism." Patents granted prior to the AIA becoming effective aren't invalidated, but new ones can't issue. Hadn't heard that before...last I read, they could. Must be a relatively recent act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 4, 2013 Share Posted June 4, 2013 Hadn't heard that before...last I read, they could. Must be a relatively recent act. It's pretty recent. It was passed on 9/16/11 (HR 1249; PL 112-29; Leahy-Smith America Invents Act) and most of the provisions went into effect this past March. It made major changes to the US patent system; the biggest being we're now a 'first to file' rather than a 'first to invent' country. Though our version of '1st to file' is a little different than that of most everybody else. There are still some administrative provisions that won't be effective until 2014 and 2015 but for all intents and purposes, this one's been live for ~3 months. The provision I mentioned previously is in Section 33. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 13, 2013 Share Posted June 13, 2013 Which brings up an interesting legal point: corporations can patent my DNA, thereby owning the rights to it. But according to this ruling, it can be legitimately used to identify me. So a corporation can patent my identifying traits? I think SCOTUS just answered this question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted June 13, 2013 Share Posted June 13, 2013 I think SCOTUS just answered this question. Yep. Good ruling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 Yer jeans is yer jeans. But the fake ones is up fer grabs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 14, 2013 Share Posted June 14, 2013 I think SCOTUS just answered this question. Yep. Like Levi said...good ruling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts