Slashdot Mirror
Stem Cell Patent Halts Hospital's Collection
eldavojohn writes "It's a classic case that comes up when dealing with patents. A hospital's research on the donated brains of deceased children has been in limbo for three years because of a challenge from a patent holder. The double-edged sword of patents that spurred investment into the field will also cause chilling effects on research like the case of the Children's Hospital of Orange County. They've now been forced to shift the money from the lab to lawyers in order to deal with this ongoing patent dispute over a technique that was developed to extract stem cells at the Salk Institute. Unfortunately the Salk Institute failed to patent the technology, so a company named StemCells happily had it approved. The real disheartening news is that CHOC's Dr. Philip H. Schwartz — the doctor collecting the cells — was one of the original researchers who helped developed this technique at the Salk Institute. Now he can't even use the technique he helped create. Schwartz has since been instructed not to publicly discuss the case further. Research interests are clashing with commercial interests in a classic case that causes one to wonder if patents surrounding medical techniques like this stretch too far. As for the people that donated their dead child's brain to research, those valuable stem cell cultures have been kept in storage instead of being disseminated to research labs (which desperately need them) across the country."
They can't patent it; it's called prior art.
Good luck getting patents to actually work how they're supposed to, though.
http://www.stemcellsinc.com/company/management.html
http://www.stemcellsinc.com/company/executiveofficers.html
http://www.stemcellsinc.com/company/scientificfounders.html
Didn't RTFA?
One of the doctors complaining is one of the doctors that invented the process.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
Google Finance knows all:
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3ASTEM
Scroll to the bottom and there is a list of Execs.
Martin McGlynn is CEO:
http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/officerProfile?symbol=STEM.O&officerId=169142
"Mr. Martin M. McGlynn serves as President, Chief Executive Officer, Director of StemCells Inc. Mr. Martin McGlynn joined the company in January 2001, when he was appointed President and Chief Executive Officer of the company and of its wholly-owned subsidiaries. Mr. McGlynn was elected to the Board of Directors in February 2001."
$1,324,380 per year is a pretty decent salary.
Even better, I found a youtube clip of it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOe_4mgmyyA
Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
The research in question was never effected by Christian fundamentalists since it does not involve embryonic stem cells. Of course that is true of all of the promising stem cell research. Christians do not have a problem with stem cell research, Christians have a problem with embryonic stem cell research. What is nice about this is that none of the research that is showing promise for providing cures involves embryonic stem cells.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
He didn't assume it, he asked about it.
And may have been thinking about the 271(e)(1) exemption or "Hatch-Waxman exemption".
So it seems that both inventions were made at the same time, independently. In that case, either party may file for and be awarded the patent in the US.
It's from the lead-in to most CSI:Miami episodes. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Horatio%20Caine/
Well the Embryonic Stem-Cell debate (which isn't what this is about) is what there is debate about, because in order to get these stem-cells you need to terminate the fetus, which is a valid moral debate without thumping the bible, because the PEOPLE who wrote the bible never even considered about thinking things to that detail. Terms of Patents just because they are protecting their patient it doesn't mean they are a Patent Troll. A lot of this type of stuff we really need a good debate on it, without finger pointing. We are blurring lines that use to be black and white. I don't think it is really going to the dark ages but more to a point we need really figure out the implementations of these problems.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
The word you're looking for is "afoul". Though you did conjure up an interesting image.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
China? Horrifying Education System? I used to teach in China. That is not one of China's weaknesses. Lack of law enforcement, yes, lack of education no. I saw an automobile accident, the other person didn't have insurance so the guy who got hit beat the crap out of the guy who hit him. The youth in China are ready for change and much of China is changing with them. They are lacking in some human rights, but their are other areas that make up for it. Cost of living is dirt cheap there, as an American Ex-Pat there you can always get a job teaching English, if nothing else. Their Drug laws are much stricter. But if I had an offer to work on stem cell research in China, I'd take it in a heartbeat. Sure beats getting sued in the US.
Whats wrong with India? Half the people I work with are from India, its a democratic country and developing at a breakneck pace; not as fast as China but democracy moves slower than communism with the advantage of more freedom.
What kind of crap have you been reading about the UAE? Not all UAE states have draconian laws for women. Dubai has a western like culture and is very tolerant of westerners. Yes some of the UAE states are strict, but not all; and it is changing for the better.