Taq Polymerase Ad/Any uses other than PCR?

Sami Kohan skohan at ucla.edu
Mon Oct 9 15:50:04 EST 1995


In article <SMI-0410951856290001 at 204.157.202.128> David G. Jensen,
SMI at sedona.net writes:
> This might have been an ad for Promega Corporation. In my opinion, this
> company should be the sole source of Taq for ALL labs. That's because
the
> company is fighting a huge battle with Roche over the ability for anyone
> in the USA to do research using PCR without having to pay Roche for the
> license. They are literally David taking on Goliath, and it seems to me
> that they are all alone in this effort. Other companies should have
jumped
> in to help them defray their legal costs. . . but, instead Promega's
> competitors choose to sit on the sidelines and/or cave in to Roche,
> waiting for the results of the lawsuit (which appears to be going in
> Promega's favor). When Promega wins, EVERYONE wins. 
> 
> And the fact of the matter is that it won't affect the bottom line at a
> company the size of Roche more than about .00000001%.


I always get annoyyed when I see non-science questions on this newsgroup
but I couldn't help myself. Why shouldn't Roche collect royalties on PCR.
They own the patent to the technique. Do you not believe in patents? Or
do you not believe in patents when they are held by large profitable
companies(which you seem to be implying).  How does everyone win if
intellectual property rights are not preserved.



More information about the Bioforum mailing list