Law and ethics of bio-inspiration: patent vs. nature

The article analyzes the legal intricacies associated with bio-inspiration, focusing on the distinction between a biological discovery and a patented invention. The author explains that patent law does not protect natural phenomena or biological ideas themselves, but rather their specific technical implementation created by humans. Using examples such as the CRISPR-Cas9 system or the humpback whale fin structure, the text shows that legal protection applies to a solution defined in the patent claims, not a monopoly on an organism's trait. The requirements of novelty and inventive step according to the European Patent Convention and Polish Industrial Property Law are also discussed, pointing to the paradox of biological prior art, where nature provides inspiration but does not automatically constitute an obstacle to patenting a technical rule of operation.