|
|
|
| Authored by: frederik on Thursday, June 13 2013 @ 03:02 PM EDT |
My first argument is that cDNA of cellular mRNA is no different from DNA in the
sense that it is a copy of naturally occurring information. Thus, it should not
be patentable.
However, I can construct a DNA molecule that is more or less novel, for instance
containing some [synthetic] regulatory sequence and BRCA1 sequence. I have now
expressed potentially novel information.
Here, if I understand correctly, you are arguing that it should not be possible
to patent or copyright naturally occurring sequences. I agree on both accounts.
I think a copyright-like protection on the particular arrangement of A, C, G, T
of my molecule above would at least make more sense than a patent. Even in that
case, the exclusion could not extend to other molecules simply because they also
contain parts of BRCA1.
This type of protection would prevent a competitor from stealing the exact
molecule +/- make insignificant modifications. It does not prevent anyone else
from doing anything else with BRCA1 sequence and of course wouldn't interfere
with your rights to do what you are doing with your genome.
It's a little bit like a compilation of addresses. I can get protection
(copyright) against someone who reprints it, but it does not cover the addresses
themselves or other compilations containing the addresses.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
