Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Patents and Open Source Biotech

Posted by michael on from the my-new-asian-bird-flu-technique-is-unstoppable dept.

sebFlyte writes "Since Slashdot readers seem to be interesting in the issues and problems surrounding software patents, I thought they might be interested to see that Wired is running an interesting piece on patents in Biotech and the way that they can hold up important research, and how there are clear parallels with the open source software community with the way that advocates of openness are trying to solve these problems."

6 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. Nice linking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Takes you to the second page of the article. For those who like to skip to the end I guess. first page

  2. Simple solution ... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Exclude living systems and their components (e.g., genes) from the patent system. Period. End of story.

    For those who whine, "But then there won't be any incentive to innovate!" ... GMAFB. Innovation in biotech (and in pretty much every technical field) is done by scientists, not moneymen. And the scientists will continue to do their jobs, whether for prestige or a desire to aid their fellow man or just out of sheer intellectual curiosity. Most of them will do it, BTW, in university labs, not corporate "R&D" shops, just the way they always have.

    If the suits want to make a profit, they'll have to work a little harder to figure out how. Watch me weep in sympathy.

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    1. Re:Simple solution ... by pbody · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not that I'm a lover of the patent system, but the scientists do not work independently of the moneymen. Government grants only go so far, but the push to patent is VERY strong in the universities. Which personally sucks for me (my field is theoretical physics), and even though I don't do patents, but I still have to justify the work to the moneymen on a regular basis :( We're (sadly?) way past the times when a person/group who wants to do experimental work can just do their jobs without big $$ support.

    2. Re:Simple solution ... by fhic · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The parent company of the company I work for has recently developed a noninvasive screening test for colon cancer. Basically, you poop in a bucket and the poop is analyzed for fragments of RNA that are associated with cancerous cells. The company spent approximately a bazillion dollars developing this test.

      So how do you let them protect their investment? The detection processes are already patented (we license them, at a cost of another bazillion dollars a year.) They can't patent the poop itself-- everyone's is different. So they patented the structure of the detectable fragments. Did they invent the fragment itself? Of course not, the cancer cells did. But they made these particular fragments incredibly valuable, in one particular context.

      Do these patents prevent someone else from discovering another, equally detectable fragment? No. All it does is protect the company's investment in R&D, while still allowing them to provide a reasonable profit while providing a valuable service.

      If it weren't possible to patent such things, this research would never have been done. And believe me, if you've ever had a colonoscopy, you'd be damned pleased that an alternate technology exists.

  3. Same thing happening in film/media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative


    Is copyright killing culture? Some documentary filmmakers certainly think so.

  4. What am I missing here? by espressojim · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Here's an article quite:
    BIOS will soon launch an open-source platform that promises to free up rights to patented DNA sequences and the methods needed to manipulate biological material.

    I thought you can't patent DNA sequences, only processes on sequences. Gene patents without specific purposes were thrown out years ago, weren't they?

    I understand why methods are being patented. They are costly to develop. They aren't obvious. Without patents, I'm not sure what the desire is to invent a new method to cheaply assay something.

    My work uses data very similar to sequence data (genotype data), and the data gathering process has become a commodity over the last few years. Everyone's developed their own machines, methodologies, and patents. You can sign up with any of these guys, and essentially the bottom line is: cents / data point. You weight that in against the size of the batches you're planning on doing over the next number of years, the reliability and service provided by the company's platform, and go.

    These companies would not be innovating newer, cheaper solutions if I could just take those solutions back to the lab and they didn't earn a penny for their effort. As it is, these companies are working on slim margins, and not many of the startups are successful.

    In the past, before these companies came out with their turnkey solutions, we'd have to roll our own. And that means detection systems, possibly robots, databases, protocols for chemical processes, etc.

    When I worked in the lab, we did one of these, based on a paper that was published in 1999. Even standing on the back of another researcher, it took us 18 months to have a working assay system that was 'production ready' for JUST OUR LAB (granted, it's the MIT genome center, and we're a big-ass lab.) Just about the time we finished, the first decent turn key solution came out...and it was cheaper and easier than what we'd developed.

    I love what I do for a living. It's a good time, and interesting work. Would I do it for free, if I had to work a normal job?

    No way. This job alone takes huge amounts of time, outside research, etc to excel. If I wasn't compensated for my hard work, I'd have no time to *do* that hard work.

    (given all that, we're working on open-sourcing chunks of our source code, to at least give something back to the community - but source code is the least of our assets.)