Amersham takes over USB - Canadian price for Sequenase soars

Jim Owens jow at helix.nih.gov
Fri Jul 30 13:24:33 EST 1993


In article <1993Jul30.165515.8641 at crc.ac.uk> David Martin x3175,
dmartin at crc.ac.uk writes:
>I may be ignorant of us law but cannot one devise a novel mutation that 
>improves taq however marginally?
>
>would this get around the patent laws?
>

I guess it might, but I'm not sure.

>(Patenting some thing you did not invent surely is a little difficult. 
>Patenting a process I can understand but a naturally occurring product?
Ok,
>so recombinant taq is not natural because of the production, so just use
a
>differrent method of production (different vector). It's a bit like
patenting
>grass for feeding cattle....)

I don't think the patent covers Taq polymerase itself or its preparation.
 I think the patent covers using it (and perhaps other DNA polymerases)
for PCR.  Thus, BRL and other vendors of Taq polymerase have to specify
that they are selling it for some other purpose than PCR, like,
sequencing.  Check their catalogs.  They state that purchase of their Taq
polymerase is not a license to use it for PCR.

Jim Owens



More information about the Methods mailing list