The necessary balance between incentivizing and rewarding innovation with making those innovations widely available—and not stifling advancements by keeping competitors down—has been at the heart of patent law for some time. We saw it in Apple v. Samsung not too far back. But the importance of this issue reaches a new level when we’re discussing health care and medical research. The Supreme Court weighed the aforementioned balance last week when it heard oral arguments in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, in which the patentability of genes that cause breast cancer is at stake. Joining me to analyze those oral arguments is Antoinette Konski of Foley & Lardner and the Personalized Medicine Bulletin.