Declaration_Against_cDNA_Patenting

[Cornelius Krasel]

In <1993Feb3.081206.28015 at klaava.Helsinki.FI> tolvanen at klaava.Helsinki.FI (Martti Tolvanen) writes:

>In <BASHFORD.93Feb1234155 at zippy.scripps.edu> bashford at scripps.edu (Don &) writes:

>>I'll probably sign, but I must say that I am disappointed by the weakness
>>of this declaration.  It doesn't even mention patents directly, only giving
>>the vague reference to "the dangers of monopolization."  Some will argue
>>that patenting of cDNA does not raise any danger of monopolization so long
>>as the patent holder sells to more than one producer.

>>I'd rather see a declaration that since cDNA data is part of "our
>>human scientific heritage" it cannot be made into the any form of
>>"intellectual property," such as patent right held by any individual
>>or institution but should available to all people withount restraints
>>or preconditions.

>One has to remember that patenting does permit all non-commercial use of
>the disclosed sequences or whatever.  Actually the patent system was set

I heard a rumour that Perkin Elmer tried to sue labs who purified Taq
polymerase for their own use. Has anybody more accurate information?
--
/* Cornelius Krasel, Department of Physiological Chemistry, U Tuebingen    */ 
/* email: krasel at studserv.zdv.uni-tuebingen.de (Internet)   HAS CHANGED!!  */
/*        NO WIN/X400 MAIL POSSIBLE AT THE MOMENT!                         */
/* "People are DNA's way of making more DNA." (R. Dawkins / anonymous)     */