Building the $100 Thermocycler

A.F. Simpson AFS7 at le.ac.uk
Wed Feb 2 19:16:27 EST 2000


Richard P. Grant wrote:
> 
> In article <38987C9A.32E0 at le.ac.uk>, "A.F. Simpson" <AFS7 at le.ac.uk>
> wrote:
> 
> > You might want to be careful.  As I understand it, the overturned patent
> > concerned Taq polymerase only.  The PCR process itself (and hence
> > machines to perform it) is still covered by various other patents.
> 
> But there's nothing stopping you making a thermocycler anyway.  You
> don't *have* to use it for PCR. . .

However, I think at the very least a name change from 'OpenPCR' would be
called for :-)  And you would have to _tell_ people that they can't use
it for PCR, thus removing the point of the exercise.  If the goal is to
produce very cheap cyclers for schools, etc, it would be terribly unkind
to let them violate the PCR patents without making it very clear to them
that is what using the machine for PCR would mean.  I doubt many schools
wouild want to take legal risks like that.

> Richard P. Grant MA DPhil

love
Anna




More information about the Methods mailing list