I seem to have misunderstood patent law, as I understood it to only limit commercial use of the patented thing, and not affect personal use.

Thanks for clarifying this for me.

Clearly patent thus overreaches any just and lawful authority, and the ruling of the SCOTUS regarding DNA patent reveals this. Since SCOTUS ruled that DNA cannot be patented because it is naturally occurring, then it follows that anything naturally occurring cannot be patented. H. sapiens is clearly naturally occurring, and ideas are inevitably the natural consequences of H. sapiens.

It seems to me then that the natural ideas of natural H. sapiens cannot be patented lawfully, but only those ideas produced by H. sapiens that result from cDNA alteration. I suspect this will be used to challenge the SCOTUS ruling, and SCOTUS eventually will either have to invalidate patent law altogether, or reverse it's ruling on DNA patentability.

Thanks!