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 : Incyte (INCY) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lnkennedy who wrote (1863)	12/23/2001 3:09:41 AM
From: Rocketman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3202

Agreed, the companies were calling the shots and agreed to not agree - in the meantime they squandered millions to get nothing except both their market caps hurt and give competitors a better chance. INCY and AFFX had some great cooperative efforts when this litigation started, and I think it poisoned some great opportunities for cooperation/coopetition. Think about all the possible patent interferences that could result from the gene portfolios or the various companies and institutions - there aren't enough patent attorneys on the planet to even come close to prosecuting them. Somehow, they need to find an equitable, quick and inexpensive way to work this stuff out, or it will end up gridlocking a lot of valuable R&D. I like the idea of a gene patent clearinghouse that administers royalties - similar to the ASCAP model for the music industry in some ways but which would also arbitrate the disputes on IP ownership fairly and quickly without years of torturing the courts and investors. Of course the many scientists who keep crappy poorly documented notebooks would lose, but even with the current system, it eventually catches up with them. Happy Holidays Neal! Rman