GENTECH archive

[Index][Thread]

Re: SE



Thank you David!
This succinctly sums up my opinions on patenting. I'm sure you will 
agree that this is difficult to argue with!
Austin


> Reply-to:      "David Wengraf" <wengrafd@mirai.co.uk>
> From:          "David Wengraf" <wengrafd@mirai.co.uk>
> To:            <gentech@gen.free.de>
> Subject:       Re: SE
> Date:          Wed, 23 Jun 1999 16:24:14 +0100

> The point about patenting is that the invention isn't really what's being
> protected.
> It's the time, money, effort etc that the inventor has put into the work.
> There has to be a certain amount of difference, or the new product can be
> classed as a copy of another product.
> However, SE is less to do with this than with the end effect on the
> organism.
> 
> David Wengraf
> MA Biotechnological Law and Ethics
> Sheffield University, UK.
> 
> dave@bedlam.syol.com
> http://www.bedlam.syol.com
> 
> >Trevor Lien,
> >
> >Sorry I must be thicker than a brick but if I understand your description
> >of SE it is difficult to understand the basis for many biotech patents (I'm
> >talking about Canada, which is where I live also).  I perfectly well
> >understand the economic need for patents but, as someone who has always
> >thought the chemical corporations made a huge mistake by not embracing
> >labeling of their life science products,  it is tough to bring together the
> >principles of SE and patenting.  It seems on the one hand they say
> >everything is the same and on the other that it is completely different.
> >Can we have it both ways?
> 
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> The address for any administrative command like unsubscribe,
> subscribe or help is:
> 
>               GENTECH-REQUEST@gen.free.de
> 
> The searchable WWW list archive is available at
> 
>               http://www.gene.ch/archives.html 
> 
>