Ayahuasca on Trial

The patenting of the ayahuasca strain 'Da Vine' by Loren Miller in 1986 was later challenged by Indigenous peoples of Ecuador, who argued the plant was not novel due to its long traditional use. The US Patent and Trademark Office initially revoked the patent in 1999 after finding evidence of the strain in US botanical museums before Miller's application, but Miller's appeal reinstated the patent for its remaining life. This case illustrates how international patent law perpetuates colonial power dynamics by ignoring Indigenous knowledge and practices, legitimizing the appropriation of sacred plants.

Study at a glance

Abstract

In 1986, American scientist and entrepreneur Loren Miller received Plant Patent No. 5, 751 on a “novel” strain of the ayahuasca plant, which he named “Da Vine.” Indigenous tribes and healers had been using ayahuasca for hundreds of years before it was brought into Western culture. Miller’s accepted claim to novelty, however, was founded on this particular strain’s color and medicinal properties. Several years after his “discovery,” Indigenous peoples of Ecuador learned that their sacred plant had been patented and demanded that Miller’s patent be revoked for not meeting the novelty requirements of the US Plant Patent Act. In 1999, the US Patent and Trademark Office revoked Miller’s patent based on evidence of the strain’s existence in US botanical museums prior to Miller’s licensing. Subsequent to this decision, however, Miller filed for an appeal, and his “Da Vine” patent was reinstated for its remaining life span. This case demonstrates how international patent law reinscribes asymmetrical power relations between the “West and the rest” by deferring to a legal structure that remains inherently colonial in nature and practice. Beginning with a history of patent law, this paper examines Miller’s case as it disregards Indigenous existence, legitimizes property theft, and commodifies a sacred plant.