Navigating the future(s) of biotech intellectual property

Cukier, Kenneth Neil

doi:10.1038/nbt0306-249

Cited by 26 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They support the widespread adoption of the Uniform Biological Material Transfer Agreement (UBMTA) for exchanges among scientists, long advocated by the National Institutes of Health 13 . In concurrence with previous related research, they offer no reason to continue supporting a stronger academic research exemption as urged, for example, by Cukier 14 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 66%

Patents versus patenting: implications of intellectual property protection for biological research

Lei¹,

Juneja

Wright³

2009

Nat Biotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 66%

Patents versus patenting: implications of intellectual property protection for biological research

Lei¹,

Juneja

Wright³

2009

Nat Biotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The various laboratories around the world used research standards that had to be flexible to integrate their methodologies and some even developed open source software. However, it was also decided by those running the human genome project that open source would be too controversial (Cukier 2003 ). The databases with sequence information on the human genome were made publicly accessible for everyone without the condition that enforced the sharing of this information in other formats (Sulston and Ferry 2002 : 222).…”

Section: Open Source and The Convergence Of The Life Sciences And Infmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open Genetic Code: on open source in the life sciences

Deibel

2014

Life Sci Soc Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of open source in the life sciences is increasingly being suggested as an alternative to patenting. This is an alternative, however, that takes its shape at the intersection of the life sciences and informatics. Numerous examples can be identified wherein open source in the life sciences refers to access, sharing and collaboration as informatic practices. This includes open source as an experimental model and as a more sophisticated approach of genetic engineering. The first section discusses the greater flexibly in regard of patenting and the relationship to the introduction of open source in the life sciences. The main argument is that the ownership of knowledge in the life sciences should be reconsidered in the context of the centrality of DNA in informatic formats. This is illustrated by discussing a range of examples of open source models. The second part focuses on open source in synthetic biology as exemplary for the re-materialization of information into food, energy, medicine and so forth. The paper ends by raising the question whether another kind of alternative might be possible: one that looks at open source as a model for an alternative to the commodification of life that is understood as an attempt to comprehensively remove the restrictions from the usage of DNA in any of its formats.

show abstract

“…This information will not be repeated here. The consequence of this approach has been the consolidation of many companies in the agricultural biotechnology sector [150][151][152].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant Cell Culture – Present and Future

Dunwell

2010

Plant Cell Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant cell culture has a long history of development and exploitation that has been reviewed many times [1]. There are also several monographs and textbooks that provide detailed discussion on specific techniques and their application [2, 3]. By necessity therefore, the present review is limited in scope and, for the most part, will focus on recent publications. The various sections below each concentrate on a specific aspect of the technology; these are followed by a summary section relating to commercialization. MicropropagationMicropropagation in vitro is well established as a method to propagate [4], preserve and transport germplasm of many species including horticultural [5-7], medicinal [8, 9] and woody [10,11] plants. It also reduces the risk of moving pathogens and insects with the germplasm owing to the inherent pathogen detection capabilities of aseptic cultures. Since this technology is usually limited to the multiplication of pre-existing meristems and does not involve the regeneration of plants from single cells or tissue, it will not be discussed in detail here.

show abstract

Navigating the future(s) of biotech intellectual property

Cited by 26 publications

References 8 publications

Patents versus patenting: implications of intellectual property protection for biological research

Patents versus patenting: implications of intellectual property protection for biological research

Open Genetic Code: on open source in the life sciences

Plant Cell Culture – Present and Future

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About