Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : All Clowns Must Be Destroyed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (33495)	5/18/2000 12:19:00 AM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42523

First of all Celera is only one of the players, and despite what they would have everyone believe, they aren't the furthest along on these projects and aren't even the best at what they are doing. IMO they are one of the most overvalued in the sector. < A patent of a gene sequence doesn't have practical usefulness in and of itself> Well, but this is what needs to be sifted out... what if it did! Clearly the patent office disagrees with you, and they know all the rules [invention must be useful, etc]. In fact practically daily more is being learned about genes and their functions. I tend to agree that rudimentary explaination of these 'inventions' probably won't hold up in court in the long run... but don't fool yourself. The next step probably would, ie. describing a way to 'fix' the gene, or alter it in some way... or describing an interaction between this protein and that gene etc. to fix this condition. Long story short... the human genome project [Especially the federally funded boondogle that's way behind the rest] is currently like the Rand McNally road map with only interstates on them. In the world of genomics the broken stop light at the corner of Main and 4th in Medicine Hat may be the link to gluten intolerance. We've got a long way to go, and if you don't think any of it will end up being patented IP at least in this country your dreaming... otherwise it won't get done. Finally: <Celera hasn't patented any novel use of any of the genes in such a way as to enable a knowledgeable person to practice the invention in the best mode> There are potentially millions of uses for each gene! If a man invents a corkscrew, and it turns out that it also is an amazing gizmo for your carburator... does he get royalties for the latter??? If INCY describes a gene as the blueprint for a certain birth defect, will they get royalties when someone uses that information to create a cure? Those in the know certainly think there is value in the claims... INCY itself has deals selling it's proprietary databases of sequences to many of the 'big pharma' companies, and as part of the deal they will receive royalties [albeit small... 1-2% of sales] on future drugs created out of that proprietary info. So now, EVEN IF THERE IS DOUBT [which there certainly is, especially for broad claims on a gene] about how the claim would stand up in court, those agreements supercede that uncertainty! In otherwords, the drug companies are willing to give away the chance to skate in court by signing these agreements... that's how important this infomation is, and without monetary compensation, this info wouldn't be coming out. Sorry for babbling... although I can tell you've done some of you own DD, I don't think it's nearly as cut and dried as you make it sound, this thread has ton's of stuff if you go back a ways and root around: Message 13210899 More: ladas.com DAK DAK