Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

[News] Intellectual Monopolies Kill People, Court Apathetic

  • Subject: [News] Intellectual Monopolies Kill People, Court Apathetic
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:54:45 +0100
  • Followup-to: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • User-agent: KNode/4.3.1
Hash: SHA1

Appeals Court Says Patenting Basic Medical Diagnostic Process Is Just Fine

,----[ Quote ]
| Doctors were pretty freaked out by this idea that you 
| could patent a method that seemed like basic science. 
| While a lower court agreed, the appeals court has gone the 
| other way and said that the method is patentable. The 
| patent holders insisted that this patent was necessary 
| because if it didn't get the patent it "would likely have 
| a chilling effect on future medical discovery." That, of 
| course, is ridiculous.


Patentable Subject Matter: Federal Circuit Upholds Patentability of Drug Dosage Method Claim



What use are research patents?

,----[ Quote ]
| In any case, I'm not buying David's assertion that "most universities", or
| most hospitals or research institutes for that matter, rely heavily on
| licensing income. And that being so, I am also somewhat skeptical about the
| number of researchers' families being supported by patents.
| What's the Open Science connection? Well, if you're interested in patenting
| the results of your research, there are a lot of restrictions on how you can
| disseminate your results. You can't keep an Open Notebook, or upload
| unprotected work to a preprint server or publicly-searchable repository, or
| even in many cases talk about the IP-related parts of your work at
| conferences. It seems from the data above that most universities would not be
| losing much if they gave up chasing patents entirely; nor would they be
| risking much future income, since so few seem to get significant funds from
| licensing.


Time to rethink intellectual property laws?

,----[ Quote ]
| Conversely, there is widespread anecdotal evidence that the act created a
| mind-set among many researchers that their knowledge represents a potential
| goldmine not to be shared with potential competitors (i.e. those working in
| other universities) - at least until it has been protected by a patent
| application.
| Similarly, the act has led to a flood of âupstreamâ patents on basic
| scientific knowledge, leading to what some commentators describe as a
| virtually impenetrable âpatent thicketâ blocking small-scale inventors from
| marketing their products. For example, restrictive software patents limit
| further development and commercialisation in the field of information
| technology.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index