|
Fighting over mouse brains may seem picayune, but the larger issue is
ownership of the genetic recipe for life. The case of the smarter mouse,
patent pending, is not an isolated one: among the patents granted for
human genes are blindness (Axys Pharmaceuticals), epilepsy (Progenitor),
and Alzheimer's (Glaxo Wellcome). Rights to the gene which controls
arthritis will be worth millions, breast cancer, billions, and the
company that patents the genes that control weight loss can write their
own ticket. As the genome code becomes an essential part of industries
from bio-computing and cybernetic interfaces to cosmetics and nutrition,
the social and economic changes it instigates are going to make the
effects of the Internet seem inconsequential. Unfortunately for us,
though, the Internet's intellectual property is mostly in the public
domain, while the genome is largely -- and increasingly -- private.It didn't have to be this way. Patents exist to encourage investment by
guaranteeing a discoverer time to recoup their investment before facing
any competition, but patent law has become increasingly permissive in
what constitutes a patentable discovery. There are obviously patents to
be had in methods of sequencing genes and for methods of using those
sequences to cure disease or enhance capability. But to allow a gene
itself to be patented makes a mockery of "prior art," the term which
covers unpatented but widely dispersed discoveries. It is prior art which
keeps anyone from patenting fire, or the wheel, and in the case of
genetic information, life itself is the prior art. It is a travesty of
patent law that someone can have the gene for Alzheimer's in every cell
of their body, but that the patent for that gene is owned by Glaxo
Wellcome. The real action, of course, is not in mouse brains but in the human
genome. Two teams, one public and one private, are working feverishly to
sequence all of the 100,000 or so genes which lie within the 23 pairs of
human chromosomes. The public consortium aims to release the sequence
into the public domain, while the private group aims to patent much of
the genome, especially the valuable list of mutations that cause genetic
disease. The competition between these two groups has vastly accelerated
the pace of the work -- moving it from scheduled completion in 2005 to
next year -- but the irony is that this accelerated timetable won't give
the public time to grasp the enormous changes the project portends. By
this time next year, the fate of the source code for life on earth -- open
or closed -- will be largely finished, long before most people have even
begun to understand what is at stake.
Clay Shirky is a contributing editor at FEED and Professor of Media Studies at Hunter College.
Post your thoughts on today's column in
the
FEED Daily Loop. For discussion of other recent FEED Dailies, check
out last month's Daily Loop.

The Joe Cartoon company is as sick as they come. Check out their latest creation, "Where my dog?" and the classic "MicroGerbil," which sheds new light on the hamsterdance craze.
If the excitement over the newly remastered version Yellow Submarine says anything, it's that The Beatles'
pop tunes haven't lost any of their immediacy -- or their earning power.
Here's a preview, compliments of CNN.
|