>However, it was held that Mr Moore’s spleen was not his property so, while he could claim for breach of fiduciary duty and a lack of informed consent, he could

>However, it was held that Mr Moore’s spleen was not his property so, while he could claim for breach of fiduciary duty and a lack of informed consent, he could not claim for the consequences of the conversion. It was the researchers who were held to own the cell line over which they had been granted a patent because of their application of skill to Mr Moore’s original cells. That makes me wonder if skill is a defense and how one would demonstrate skill. While many of the examples were international, this one was California based, so I looked up what skill is in a legal dictionary with US examples: >Practical and familiar knowledge of the principles and processes of an art, science, or trade, combined with the ability to apply them in practice in a proper and approved manner and with readiness and dexterity. [1] So if you could demonstrate knowledge of the procedure and were familiar with some equipment manuals, could you make a claim? If you lacked equipment and resources, would that be a defense for the other side? About approved manner, as there are biohackers, and the ability to work in other countries or perhaps partner up with a licensed company, I wonder if any of those would work as a defense. [1] https://thelawdictionary.org/skill/ https://thelawdictionary.org/skill/