From phm@a2e.de  Sun Aug 27 20:57:29 2000
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2000 22:57:29 +0200 (CEST)
From: PILCH Hartmut phm@a2e.de
Subject: [Patents] Re: ePatents and Aids-Patents

> > actually be shown to produce some positive results.  At the same time, by
> > extending patents to genes, the patent offices are probably serving only
> > themselves and a group of greedy investors.
> > 
> 
> FYI:
>     I think I read an article in the (U.K) Times a few months back that said the reason why
> patents were granted for genes. was because the 'R & D' communities were moving
> the process way to slow, and it would have taken about 300 years or so to
> fully map human dna using traditional methods. The patents were granted to
> allow the reaseach lab to obtain the funding to speed up the process. This means
> that we get a complete map of the dna much earlier than predicted .. and all the
> benefits and problems that brings with it.. Welcome to the 21st Century folks..

For this purpose it would have been possible to create a sui generis
rewarding system or to fund an international research program.

Plying the patent system for that purpose means rewarding uninventive (but
tedious and costly) work with rights that may go too far.  It is like
granting patents on geographical data or on all the words of a new huge
dictionary.

There was an interesting article on this by the German MP Wolfgang Wodarg
(SPD), which I summarized (in German) on the swpat@ffii.org mailing list
recently (http://ffii.org/archive/mails/swpat/2000/Aug/).  Wodarg is a
supporter of the Eurolinux petition, and his article in a medical journal
carries the nice title "Schwammige Definitionen, Moralische Lyrik" (vague
definition, moral lyrics) with explanations that apply in exactly the same
way to the patenting of information.  

The only difference is that by making the genome patentable, arguably some
research will be done more quickly, while software patentability seems to
discourage innovation in the software field, as Bessen & Maskin (MIT dept
of economics) analysed in http://www.researchoninnovation.org/patent.pdf

Still, we should formulate some more petitions soon that will allow us to
join hands with the anti-genepatent groups and focus the opposition on
worthwhile goals, such as removing the patent-universalist formulas from
TRIPS. 

-phm





