Slashdot Mirror


Outstanding Achievements In Biopiracy - 2004

mr_don't writes "The Coalition Against Biopiracy is hosting yet another 'Captain Hook Awards,' for 'Outstanding Achievements in Biopiracy.' So far, only a few nominees have been submitted, but a key one is for Melbourne-based Genetic Technologies for 'having patented the non-coded DNA of all living creatures, including humans.' The web site is calling for 'help to identify the Greediest, Most Offensive and Dangerous biopirates from across the globe' -- I am sure Slashdot readers certainly know of a few."

5 of 34 comments (clear)

  1. Yet another example... by ivern76 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Of how braindead the patent system is. How can they allow someone to patent something they didn't even *invent*? I'm very surprised none of those companies they're suing have tried to get the patent declared invalid, there's prior art going back a few million years...

  2. A little more info please by Ignis+Flatus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It may simply be a patent on "methods for researching non-coded, or "junk", DNA."

    So what's the problem with that? I'd like to see a little evidence that they've indeed "patented the non-coded DNA of all living creatures", and not just come up with some convenient way to analyze it.

    1. Re:A little more info please by mlush · · Score: 2, Interesting
      It may simply be a patent on "methods for researching non-coded, or "junk", DNA."
      So what's the problem with that? I'd like to see a little evidence that they've indeed "patented the non-coded DNA of all living creatures", and not just come up with some convenient way to analyze it.

      If your working on 'junk DNA' in any species, you will have to pay them royalties I'd say that that counted as a patent (I bet that the patent is written so broardly that it covers all techniques (both persent and undiscovered)).

      On top of that the definition of a gene is very unclear. For a start there are things called pseudogenes these have the sequence of a gene, but are effectivly junk DNA, if I cloned a pseudogenes by accident (easy enough to do if your looking for the real gene) and my institution has no license, will they get sued?

      Finally the some convenient way to analyze junk DNA are almost certain to be straightforward and obvious with masses of prior art

      I'm willing to bet that the 'methods for researching non-coded, or "junk", DNA' will almost certanally be really really obvious with masses of prior art. On top of that the real trouble is that what is junk DNA

  3. To whom does DNA belong? by ajs318 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My DNA belongs to me, obviously.

    But what about DNA in other life forms? I have a piebald gerbil, who everyone thinks is the prettiest of the lot. Whose is her DNA? Have I the right to breed from her and sell the offspring? Probably not if you believe the animal rights extremists {BTW, if you're one of them: organic fertiliser is made from animals} but what's a gerbil going to do by way of revenge? {Apart from escape from her cage and chew through my CAT5 in several places, but that's too horrible a thought to contemplate}. However, once I have sold any of my fancy-coloured gerbils, I lose all claim to them. I can't prevent them breeding {actually it is physically possible to sterilise a gerbil, but the anaesthetic is the sticking point; too little and it dies of pain, too much and it never comes around. You could dilute the dope to measure it [easier to measure whole grammes at 0.1% than milligrammes at full strength], but you'd need to re-purify it before administering it.} Anyway. The point is that if I breed an animal or a plant, its DNA does not belong to me.

    Or, suppose I had bred a certain Medicinal Herb that had particularly fine qualities, with the intention of selling it in ten-pound wraps. If I really wanted to make sure nobody else could grow my wonder Weed, then I should be responsible for making sure it has no viable seeds in it -- and if I fail, and someone else starts selling the same product cheaper, well, that's my tough titty. {Don't try this at home, kids; the offspring from first generation hybrids may bear little resemblance to the parent stock. Draw some mendel diagrams if you want to prove it to yourself.} DNA is in the Public Domain. We just haven't quite finished recovering the source from the munged binaries we were given.

    At any rate, we need to push for an INTERNATIONAL law that there is NO "INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY" IN LIVING THINGS, and impose sanctions on countries whose laws do not recognise this concept. This may upset a few rich people, but so did the abolition of slavery. Ultimately it would ensure that science would benefit society {e.g. disease-resistant crops to feed the world} rather than harming it {e.g. high-maintenance crops upon which biotechnology and associated companies, and precious few others, get fat}.

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  4. Consider Stallman's essay on "Biopiracy" by jbn-o · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I came across an interesting essay of RMS' on "biopiracy" that is worth considering.