Patents vs open source

do-patents-restrict-innovation

 

 

Do inventions restrict innovation? Is there an awkward relationship between open source and patents? I find out, using the CRISPR-Cas system, a new genome editing technique, as a case study. Some believe that the first patent which has come from an engineered version of the CRISPR-Cas system has reopened a pandora’s box for gene patents.

Contributors
1) Mr Trevor Baylis – The inventor of the first wind-up radio
2) Dr Fillip Port – Postdoctoral Researcher at the MRC Laboratory for Molecular Biology, Cambridge and the founder of the CRISPR Fly Design Website
3) Dr Julie Nixon – Lawyer in the process of qualifying as a solicitor specialising in the life sciences at MBM Commercial, Edinburgh

 

IMAGE: BlueSci 

Related Posts

One thought on “Patents vs open source

  1. Hello,

    I use it quite often when I must share sensitive invention information on my public blog.
    I mention to take patent but in order for a humanitarian invention to reach and have humanitarian fieldwork results as much as possible, it is best to share the production rights to any market involved formal competition.
    This way, the first best next thing upgrading living and working standards is something the existing sector upgrades its, gladly all together.

    The benefit lays not in monopoly, the benefit lays in measured smooth royalty on production right shared with ‘normal’ companies.
    It is control for outcome and secure that not just anyone can take a patent and be selfish and fail the possible game change.
    It is to know that sharing ideas is only good when keeping it is risky. The advice should go viral for humanitarian inventions are about production rights to share with interested production companies knowing the business what it replaces.

    Sincerely yours,

    Dirk Gielen blog
    Belgium

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *