|
|
|
|
|
by phryk
4727 days ago
|
|
I think it may be better if we were allowed to protect engineered DNA sequences with copyright as you suggest. Aren't patents at least not applicable to non-commercial uses? Using copyright seems even worse. I'm against any legal protection of any DNA sequence. This seems like the sort of thing that doesn't just have the potential to greatly stifle innovation but also to take on a very dystopian shape… |
|
Could you be more specific? I'm not sure how we'd be able to do our business (years of work to develop an engineered microbe) if someone could just take it when we're done. Maybe we could keep it as trade secret and let no one else see it, but that's probably even worse long term for innovation.
I'm for a balanced approach to IP, but total removal of IP would basically prevent any real innovation in biotech with the tech of today. No one would do the original development, it's just way too expensive.