Team:DTU-Denmark/IP and Synthetic Biology

From 2013.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
(Created page with "{{:Team:DTU-Denmark/Templates/StartPage|Discussion on IP and Synthetic Biology}} In order to discuss the issues around intellectual property rights and synthetic biology, we met...")
Line 1: Line 1:
{{:Team:DTU-Denmark/Templates/StartPage|Discussion on IP and Synthetic Biology}}
{{:Team:DTU-Denmark/Templates/StartPage|Discussion on IP and Synthetic Biology}}
 +
 +
== Participants ==
In order to discuss the issues around intellectual property rights and synthetic biology, we met with:
In order to discuss the issues around intellectual property rights and synthetic biology, we met with:
Line 8: Line 10:
Our discussion focused around the impact that the recent Myriad Genetics Supreme Court ruling would have on synthetic biology.
Our discussion focused around the impact that the recent Myriad Genetics Supreme Court ruling would have on synthetic biology.
 +
 +
== Myriad Genetics Ruling Summary ==
 +
 +
This ruling states that while naturally occurring human genes cannot be patented, cDNA which is derived from a human gene can be. 
 +
 +
== Discussion ==
 +
 +
====Why aren't genes subject to copyright instead of patent law?====
 +
Jakob: EU law states that they cannot be copyrighted.
 +
Michael: In the US, no one has tried to copyright genes, but it could be possible.
 +
 +
==== The ruling was applied only to the non-patentability of human genes; is it reasonable to expect that it will be extended to all natural genes?====
 +
All: Not going to speculate
{{:Team:DTU-Denmark/Templates/EndPage}}
{{:Team:DTU-Denmark/Templates/EndPage}}

Revision as of 17:43, 12 September 2013

Discussion on IP and Synthetic Biology

Contents

Participants

In order to discuss the issues around intellectual property rights and synthetic biology, we met with:

  • Jakob Krag Nielsen, IP lawyer at Rønne & Lundgren
  • Michael Cohen, IP lawyer at Gray Plant Moody
  • Thomas Tscherning, director at TTO of Aarhus University

Our discussion focused around the impact that the recent Myriad Genetics Supreme Court ruling would have on synthetic biology.

Myriad Genetics Ruling Summary

This ruling states that while naturally occurring human genes cannot be patented, cDNA which is derived from a human gene can be.

Discussion

Why aren't genes subject to copyright instead of patent law?

Jakob: EU law states that they cannot be copyrighted. Michael: In the US, no one has tried to copyright genes, but it could be possible.

The ruling was applied only to the non-patentability of human genes; is it reasonable to expect that it will be extended to all natural genes?

All: Not going to speculate


Retrieved from "http://2013.igem.org/Team:DTU-Denmark/IP_and_Synthetic_Biology"