Slashdot Mirror


Venter Institute Claims Patent on Synthetic Life

jimsnail writes "J. Craig Venter and the Institute that bears his name are again moving into new territory in the field of genetics. Genetic patents, that is. They are seeking a broad patent that would give them ownership of a 'free living organism that can grow and replicate' constructed entirely from synthetic DNA. The ETC Group is challenging the claim. 'Scientists at the institute designed the bacterium to have a "minimal genome"--the smallest set of genes any organism can live on. The project, which began in the early 2000s, was partly a philosophical exercise: to help define life itself better by identifying its bare-bones requirements. But it was also fraught with commercial possibilities: if one could reliably recreate a standardized, minimal life form, other useful genes could be added in as needed for various purposes.'"

4 of 163 comments (clear)

  1. Gerbluh? by AdmiralWeirdbeard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Uh, doesnt that seem rather overbroad? I mean, there's nothing about methodology, just 'we own any synthetic life.' What utter bullshit. Why dont they try to patent nonsynthetic life while they're at it?

    --
    Come read my stupid blagablog. Rants and Giggles
    1. Re:Gerbluh? by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not much different from "we own anything that results in being able to make an online purchase via one click."

  2. Not patenting all life... by PhysicsPhil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article: "The researchers filed their patent claim on the artificial organism and on its genome."

    These guys have created a brand new form of life from the ground up and are patenting their particular genome. It's hard work, and certainly not obvious or trivial. Given that other biological systems are patentable (e.g., the Harvard mouse, new strains of wheat), this certainly seems to clear the bar for patentability.

    1. Re:Not patenting all life... by AdmiralWeirdbeard · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Granted, however it reads as though it seeks to cover any and all future synthetic life as well. By defining terms in such a broad fashion, they leave little room for others to follow, regardless of methodology. And that's bullcrap.

      --
      Come read my stupid blagablog. Rants and Giggles