Dr. Duncan Clark Duncan at nospam.demon.co.uk
Thu Jan 20 10:13:02 EST 2000

In article <IRy8h0ARTuh4EAhM at genesys.demon.co.uk>, Dr. Duncan Clark
<Duncan at nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <3886347B.9FBA6EFB at biocomp.unl.edu>, Chris Larosa
><clarosa at biocomp.unl.edu> writes
>>Dont worry about the patent licence in the united states.  The Hoffman-
>>patents were recently invalidated in US federal court.

Let me just play devils advocate on this as well. Basically I just like
to stir up a debate :) 

You work in a country for which the PCR patents are valid. You discover
something wonderful, a method, gene or whatever that either you of your
facility wish to patent. The work done to gain the patent involves the
use of PCR. You use unlicensed enzyme on an unauthorised machine. You go
ahead get your patent and start making big bucks. 

However along comes someone/corporate concern etc. who had the same idea
but missed out of the patent or someone who feels your patent is worthy
of challenge. Your notebooks from x years previously are gone through
with a fine tooth comb in court and it turns out that you used someone
else's patented process, in this case PCR, to get the results which went
into your patent/patent claims. Crunch time. Could the court rule your
patent invalid because of this? Would the owner of the PCR process then
have any claims themselves on your patent and so on?

As I say I'm just playing devils advocate with a hypothetical situation.
I don't know the answer but presumably there must be previous cases in
patent law. 

The problem with being on the cutting edge is that you occasionally get 
sliced from time to time....

Duncan Clark
DNAmp Ltd.
Tel: +44(0)1252376288
FAX: +44(0)8701640382

More information about the Immuno mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net