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.

Biotech / Medical : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (2464)	1/5/2001 2:10:15 PM
From: keokalani'nui	Respond to of 52153

This will be fun to talk about. Friday January 5, 1:44 pm Eastern Time U.S. issues new patent guidelines on genes By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent WASHINGTON, Jan 5 (Reuters) - The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office released new guidelines on Friday meant to clarify the controversial and ambiguous business of patenting genes. The rules were intended to help end what has become an acrimonious debate on patenting genes, a multimillion-dollar business for many companies. They put to rest any question about whether genes can be patented -- making clear that companies may do so, though they may not patent mere genetic sequences or pieces of genes. ``But when the inventor also discloses how to use the purified gene isolated from its natural state, the application satisfies the 'utility' requirement,'' the new guidelines read. The guidelines were barely changed from interim rules issued a year ago, the Patent Office said. They leave biotech companies such as Rockville, Maryland-based Celera Genomics (NYSE:CRA - news) and Human Genome Sciences Inc. (NasdaqNM:HGSI - news) free to continue patenting genes they are racing to identify. Arguments against the whole idea of patenting genes -- based on the premise that genes are a part of nature and not an invention -- were soundly rejected by the Patent Office. ``Several comments state that a gene is not a new composition of matter because it exists in nature, and/or that an inventor who isolates a gene does not actually invent or discover a patentable composition because the gene exists in nature,'' said the guidelines, posted on the Internet at access.gpo.gov. ``Another comment expressed concern that a person whose body includes a patented gene could be guilty of patent infringement.'' In response after response to more than a dozen such comments, the Patent Office said the law clearly allowed for genes to be patented, so long as those genes have been ``cloned'' or reproduced in the laboratory and their function is defined. ``An excised gene is eligible for a patent as a composition of matter or as an article of manufacture because that DNA molecule does not occur in that isolated form in nature,'' it said. ``Synthetic DNA preparations are eligible for patents because their purified state is different from the naturally occurring compound.'' The Patent Office said the practice of patenting bits and pieces of nature was not new. ``For example, Louis Pasteur received U.S. Patent 141,072 in 1873, claiming 'yeast, free from organic germs of disease, as an article of manufacture','' it said. ``Another example is an early patent for adrenaline.'' The entire sequence of a gene does not have to be published to get it patented. ``Describing the complete chemical structure, i.e., the DNA sequence, is one method of describing a DNA molecule but it is not the only method,'' it said. Companies have asked for patents on tens of thousands of human genes. Human Genome Sciences says it holds 159 patents on full-length genes, for example, and has filed applications on more than 16,000 genes.

To: scaram(o)uche who wrote (2464)	1/5/2001 4:04:12 PM
From: Scott H. Davis	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 52153

What would be incredibly refreshing to see is an analyst from a major underwriting house get a serious case of ethics, quit, form an independant advisory, NOT take any positions is company's covered, and base fees on performance after serious analysis\research. If I don't beat the market for that particulat segment or sector, then you don't owe me. Loose money and I'll give a refund. Unfortunately just about the time someone does this, a loud noise would take place outside your beroom and you'd wake up. Scott (who's made decent money bucking the streat & being stubborn - tho not nearly as much as Rick's portfolios last year.)