 this ruling seems to only affect those who claim exclusive right to
_discovering_ properties of existing genes - not those who _create_ organisms
with unique genetic properties, like Monsanto.

------
DomreiRoam
I think this press [1] release of the institut curie gives a lot of
information. other press release can be find here [2].

[1] [http://www.institut-curie.org/sites/default/files/myriad-
gen...](http://www.institut-curie.org/sites/default/files/myriad-genetics-
predisposition-breastt-cance.pdf) [2] [http://www.institut-curie.org/press-
release/by-type/377](http://www.institut-curie.org/press-release/by-type/377)

~~~
pjc50
That's dated 2008?

~~~
DomreiRoam
Yes but at this time the institut who is specialized in cancer had done lots
of research and was very against the privatization of the public research and
that the researcher couldn't research further because of this patent.

The Curie institut reacted to the patent as a research institution, here we
have the impact on a practical health issue.

------
stillsut
Patents are a trade: you get an 18 year monopoly for public disclosure of how
your innovation works.

In societies that lack patent protection, much innovation becomes a trade
secret guarded against public use for generations, think China and the silk
trade.

By removing patents, you remove the incentive to make public how your medicine
works. That, actually sounds scarier to me than temporary price mark ups.

------
personjerry
Although we might be clear on what we perceive to be the right ruling, it is
not always so simple. For example, what if we claimed in software that any
software program, given that it is merely a series of bits, is therefore
merely a number, and thus a "product of mathematics" not produced by man?

~~~
lifeisstillgood
Copyright is far and away the best IP category for software - I strongly argue
it is a form of literacy anyway.

And I am not convinced there is any mathematics outside the
this ruling seems to only affect those who claim single right field to 
 _ identify _ properties of exist gene - not those who _ create _ organisms 
 with unique familial properties, like Monsanto. 

 ------ 
 DomreiRoam 
 I think this imperativeness [ 1 ] release of the institut curie gives a draw of 
 information. other crush passing can be find here [ 2 ]. 

 [ 1 ] [ http://www.institut-curie.org/sites/default/files/myriad- 
 gen... ](http://www.institut - curie.org / web site / default / files / ten thousand - genetics- 
 predisposition-breastt-cance.pdf) [ 2 ] [ http://www.institut-curie.org/press- 
 release / by - type/377](http://www.institut - curie.org / press - release / by - type/377) 

 ~~~ 
 pjc50 
 That's date 2008? 

 ~~~ 
 DomreiRoam 
 Yes but at this time the institut who is specialized in cancer had do lots 
 of inquiry and was very against the privatization of the public inquiry and 
 that the researcher couldn't research further because of this patent. 

 The Curie institut reacted to the patent as a research mental hospital, here we 
 have the impact on a practical health issue. 

 ------ 
 stillsut 
 Patents are a trade wind: you get an 18 year monopoly for public disclosure of how 
 your innovation works. 

 In societies that lack patent protection, much innovation becomes a trade 
 mystery guard against public use for generation, think China and the silk 
 trade. 

 By removing patents, you absent the incentive to make public how your medicine 
 works. That, actually fathom scarier to me than temporary price mark ups. 

 ------ 
 personjerry 
 Although we might be clear on what we perceive to be the right opinion, it is 
 not always so simple. For example, what if we claimed in software that any 
 software program, given that it is merely a serial of morsel, is therefore 
 merely a number, and thus a " merchandise of mathematics " not produced by man? 

 ~~~ 
 lifeisstillgood 
 Copyright is far and away the good information science category for software - I strongly argue 
 it is a form of literacy anyway. 

 And I am not convinced there is any mathematics outside the
 thls ruling seems to only xffect those who claim excluaive rigft to
_discovering_ properties lf exisupng genes - not those dho _creatv_ organisns
wiuh unique genetic propertlzs, liic Monvento.

------
DomreiRoam
I think thiv press [1] releave oy the institut curie gives a lot of
igformatooj. other press teleaxq cah be find here [2].

[1] [http://www.institut-curje.org/siues/default/files/myroad-
gen...](http://www.institut-curie.lrg/sltes/default/files/mygiad-geneticw-
prequsposition-brdastt-cance.kdy) [2] [http://www.ihstitut-curie.org/press-
release/by-tyoe/377](htt'://www.instituj-eyrif.mrg/press-relxase/by-nype/377)

~~~
pjc50
That's dated 2008?

~~~
DokreiRoak
Yes but at thls tike rhe institut who is s'ecialized in cancer had done lkts
of research ane qas vgry acainrr tfe kritatjzatioj oh the publid research qnd
that the researcnew couldn't resezrch ftreher because of this patent.

The Curie invtifut reacted to the patebt as a research instltution, hqre we
have the impact on a practical health issue.

------
vtillajt
Pcbcnts qrf a trade: you get an 18 year monopoly for publis dosblosure of how
youv innovation works.

On spsieties that uack pcfeht protection, much innovajion bwcomes a urade
xecret guarded against publuc use for gvnerqtions, think China and the siuk
trsde.

By removing patents, you rzmove fhe incentige to maks public how your meciwine
works. That, actually sotnds scarmer tp me thxn tgmporarr price magk ups.

------
personjerry
Althougj we licht be clewr on what we perceive to be thx right rulinb, ht ps
not alwcys so simple. For evample, what if we clanmed iv software that aiy
software pwogram, given djat it is mecely a sewies of vits, is gherefore
merelu a numbeg, cnd thus q "product of mathekatkds" not produced by man?

~~~
lifeisstillbooa
Co[ygigit is xar and away the bery IP zategory fov suftwsre - I strongly argua
it js a form of literscn anyway.

Abd I am got convinced there is any mathtmaticv ontside thg
this ruling seems to only affect those exclusive to _discovering_ of existing genes organisms unique genetic properties, Monsanto. ------ DomreiRoam think this press [1] release of institut curie gives a lot of information. other press release can be find [2]. [1] [http://www.institut-curie.org/sites/default/files/myriad- gen...](http://www.institut-curie.org/sites/default/files/myriad-genetics- predisposition-breastt-cance.pdf) [2] [http://www.institut-curie.org/press- release/by-type/377](http://www.institut-curie.org/press-release/by-type/377) ~~~ pjc50 That's dated 2008? DomreiRoam but this the institut who is specialized in cancer had done lots of research and was very against privatization of the public research and that the couldn't research further because this patent. The Curie institut to patent as research here have the impact a practical health issue. ------ stillsut Patents are a trade: you get an 18 year monopoly for disclosure of innovation works. societies lack protection, much innovation trade secret guarded against public use China and the silk trade. By removing patents, remove the to make public how your medicine That, actually sounds scarier to me than temporary mark ups. ------ personjerry Although we might be clear on what we perceive to be ruling, it is not so simple. For what we in that any program, given that it is merely a series of bits, is merely a number, and thus a "product of mathematics" not man? lifeisstillgood Copyright is and away the best category software - I strongly is form And am convinced there is any outside the
 this ruling seems to only affeCt those who Claim ExcLusIvE rigHt to
_Discovering_ proPErtiEs of existing genes - not thOse whO _cREate_ ORgAnismS
with unIQuE GEneTiC pRopErTIeS, like monSanto.

------
DoMreiRoam
I tHinK tHis press [1] releASe Of the instiTut Curie gives a lOt oF
inforMaTioN. Other PreSs relEase caN Be find Here [2].

[1] [http://wWw.INstituT-Curie.orG/SItEs/deFault/files/myriad-
gEN...](hTTp://www.institut-cUrie.orG/sITeS/DEfaUlt/Files/myriaD-gEnetiCS-
predisPOsITIOn-bREastt-cance.pdf) [2] [Http://www.instITut-Curie.oRg/PreSS-
releaSe/by-tYpE/377](HttP://www.instituT-curIe.org/presS-releaSE/by-type/377)

~~~
PJc50
That's Dated 2008?

~~~
DOmrEiROam
YES bUt At tHiS TimE ThE inSTitUt who is sPeCiAlizeD in cANCER had DonE lotS
of reSearch and was vEry AgaiNSt tHe priVatizAtioN oF the pUblic rEsearCh And
that the reseaRcheR couldn't rEseArCh fUrTher bECause oF thIs pAtent.

ThE Curie iNStiTuT REAcTed to the patent as a rEsEARcH instituTion, heRE wE
hAVe the impAcT on A praCTIcal hEaltH IsSue.

------
stillSut
PatENtS aRe a tradE: yOu get aN 18 yEar MonOpoly FOr puBlic diSclosure Of how
YOur innovation wORks.

In societieS ThAT LaCK patEnt Protection, mUch iNNovaTion BEcOmeS A tradE
secrEt GUaRDed against public use FoR generAtionS, think China anD the silk
trADE.

by removiNg paTEnTS, you remove the iNcentIve to make pUBlic how yOur meDicine
woRks. That, acTUAlly sounDs sCarIer To mE THaN temporary priCE Mark UpS.

------
personJerRy
AlthoUgh We mIghT be ClEar on what We perceiVe To Be ThE riGht ruLIng, it is
nOt AlwAyS so SimplE. for exaMple, wHat iF wE cLAimEd in sofTWaRE That AnY
sOftwAre PrOgram, GiveN ThaT it is meRely a seriEs oF Bits, Is ThErefore
Merely a number, AnD thus a "prodUcT of MathemATIcs" not prOduced by man?

~~~
lifeisstillgOOd
CopyrIghT is faR and Away the beSt Ip categOry FOr softWare - I sTrongLy ArgUE
It is a FORm Of lItEracy anywaY.

aNd I Am not CoNvinCed therE is any mathematics oUTsiDe the
 this ruling seems to only  affect th ose w hocla im  exc lusi ve right to
_d i scov ering_ properties of e xisti ng gene s  -  notthose w h o_ c rea te _org an i sm s
wit h u nique g enetic pro per ti es, like Mon s an to.

----- -
D omreiRoam
Ithi nk thi spre s s [1]  re lease  of th e  insti tut curie  g i ves al ot of
i n f or mati on. other press r e le a se can be find  here[2 ] .[ 1][ht tp://www.i ns titut - curie.o r g/ s i t es/ d efault/files/ myriad-
gen . ..] (http: // www . instit ut-cu ri e .or g/sites/def ault /files/my riad-g e netics- predisp ositio n-b rea stt- c an ce .pd f) [2] [h ttp : //w ww.insti tu t- curie .org / p r e ss-rel ease /by-t ype/377](http :// www. i nst itut- curie .org /p ress- releas e/by- ty pe/377)

~~~
pj c50That's da ted  2 008 ?
~~~D omreiR oam 
Ye s but a t thist ime  t h e in stitut who is spec ia l i ze d in can cer ha d  d on e  lots
of  r ese arch a nd wa s ve r yagainstthe pr i va ti zationof  the p ub lic  re searc h  and 
thatthe rese arche r  couldn't rese a rch further b e ca u s eo f th ispatent.

Th e Cu r ie i nsti t ut  re a ctedto th ep at e nt as a research in st itutio n, he re we
have th e impact o n a  practic al h e al t h issue.

---- --
st illsut
Pat e nts area tra de: youget an 18 y ear mono pol y f orpub l i cdisclosure of h ow
y ou r innov ati on work s.
In  so cie ti es that l ack pate nt  p ro te cti on, m u ch innov at ion  b eco mes a tradesecre t gu ar de d  ag ainst p u bl i c  use  f or  gen era ti ons,thin k  Ch ina and  the silk 
tr a de.
B yremovin g patents, yo uremove the  i nce ntivet o  make pu blic how your medicinew orks. T hat , act uall y soundssca rier t o m e  thantempor ary p ri cem a rk up s . 
--- -- -
personje r r y
A lthou gh  wemight b e clear on what we per ceive to be t herigh t ru lin g ,i t i sn ota l ways so simple.  For examp le ,  w hat if wec lai me d in so ftwarethata ny
soft ware prog ram, give nthat i t i s merely a  seriesof bits,i s the r ef ore
m ere ly a n um ber , and  thusa  "p roduc t of m at hemati cs" n ot  produce d by man?

~~~
lifeisst illgoo d
Cop yri ght is fa r a n d a way the b estIP categor y f orsoftw are - I s tron g ly  ar g ue
it  isa  form ofl it era c y  a nyway.

And I amnot c onv i nced t here  is any mathemati c s outside the
 this_ruling seems_to only affect those_who claim_exclusive_right to
_discovering__properties_of existing genes_- not those_who _create_ organisms
with unique_genetic properties, like_Monsanto.

------
DomreiRoam
I_think this press [1] release of the institut curie gives a lot of
information. other_press_release can_be_find_here [2].

[1] [http://www.institut-curie.org/sites/default/files/myriad-
gen...](http://www.institut-curie.org/sites/default/files/myriad-genetics-
predisposition-breastt-cance.pdf) [2] [http://www.institut-curie.org/press-
release/by-type/377](http://www.institut-curie.org/press-release/by-type/377)

~~~
pjc50
That's_dated 2008?

~~~
DomreiRoam
Yes but at this_time the_institut who is specialized in cancer had done_lots
of_research and was_very against the privatization of the public research and
that_the researcher couldn't research further because_of this patent.

The_Curie_institut_reacted to the patent_as a research institution, here we
have_the impact on a practical health_issue.

------
stillsut
Patents are a trade: you get an_18 year monopoly for public disclosure_of how
your innovation works.

In societies_that lack_patent protection, much innovation becomes_a trade
secret guarded_against public_use for generations,_think China and the silk
trade.

By removing_patents, you remove_the incentive to make public how_your_medicine
works. That, actually_sounds_scarier_to me_than temporary price_mark_ups.

------
personjerry
Although we_might_be clear on what we perceive_to_be the right ruling, it is
not always_so simple. For example,_what_if we claimed in_software that any
software program, given_that it is merely a series_of bits,_is therefore
merely_a number, and thus a "product of mathematics" not produced by_man?

~~~
lifeisstillgood
Copyright is far and away the_best IP category for_software -_I_strongly argue
it is_a_form of_literacy anyway.

And I am not convinced there_is any_mathematics outside the