To: Brumar89 who wrote (3436 ) 2/2/2010 8:30:32 PM From: LLCF Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 69300 <I have asked you questions and your inability to answer leads me to my conclusion.> Your questions have not been relevant... as I have pointed out and you have failed to update to relevant ones. <I disagree> Yes, with no ability to point out WHY. <Do you realize you didn't say anything there about the subject in question there? > ROFMAO!! I pointed out you DIDNT EVEN READ MY POST!! If you can't read it's not my problem. < I did present examples of things where people had held IPR's (for a time) on things that were found in nature > YOu generalized "high tech IP".... I pointed out that this has nothing to do with IP on drugs, software, etc. <on things that were found in nature > Yes... of course there are (patents)... ummm, that WAS the point. These things are going to be overturned IMHO... if you READ the patents you'll see why they are completely different... and your attempt to put them in with "high tech IP" is irrelevant to the point. <If I'm wrong, just tell me what DNA from my body someone has been awarded a patent on. > Ummm, again... are to so freakin lazy as to not even being willing to do a websearch? UFB <I don't think you can.> You're kidding right? Let's see, how about a websearch like..... 1.) Has human DNA been patented? 2.) Patents on human DNA. 3.) Human genes that have been patented. Here, I'll link ONE of the endless links that pop up:news.nationalgeographic.com <<A new study shows that 20 percent of human genes have been patented in the United States, primarily by private firms and universities. >> Now, next time you wonder why I appear to make claims and not back them up: IT'S YOUR FREAKIN JOB!!! If you can't do ANY legwork, neither can I be bothered... I really don't give a rats ass if you know something or not. DAK