patent law

Podcast brought to you by: Assay Depot - the world's largest cloud-based marketplace for research services. With Assay Depot, you can easily find the perfect research service provider and manage your project from anywhere in the world.

Guest:

Joseph Jackson, StartUp Science Bio and Contact Info

Chapters (Move marker to advance)

0:50 StartUp Science Event

2:41 What do you mean by a revolution in science?

6:45 Orthodox economics doesn't account for the impact of technology

25:33 What does privacy mean today?

39:06 "I believe it's attainable to eliminate aging in the next 50 years."

46:53 What is the most influential book you've read?

Joseph Jackson is is a leader in the open science movement. He organizes the yearly Open Science Summit and most recently he's a founding member of StartUp Science, a new event and business plan competition that took place June 15, 16th here in Silicon Valley.

Joseph believes there's an organizational revolution going on in science. Not shy of being a futurist, Joseph says that it's possible to eliminate aging in the next 50 years.

Podcast Sponsor:

Traitwise.com, Phenotypic surveys

Guests:

Joseph Jackson, Organizer, Open Science Summit Bio and Contact Info

Listen (3:37) Why open science for you?

Listen (6:03) 2nd Open Science Summit

Listen (8:49) The future (or end) of IP

Listen (8:02) Does open science mean free science?

Listen (6:37) Put failures online as well

Listen (5:09) A matter of when to publish

Listen (4:50) Obstacles to open science

Dr. Tomasz Sablinski, Founder, Transparency LS Bio and Contact Info

Listen (9:32) Crowdsourcing clinical trials

Listen (5:20) Company objective

Listen (6:01) Advantages to open method

Listen (3:03) Process

Listen (4:41) Is this the future?

'Open science' is a term frequently used in the life science community today. In an interview with KQED in San Francisco, open science evangelist Joseph Jackson says, “in the long run, open science will transform the way science is done, enhancing the best aspects of science while helping correct potential abuses and distortions." Mr. Jackson is the organizer of the 2nd Open Science Summit taking place in Mountain View CA Oct 22-23. He’s a co-founder of BioCurious, a community lab in Sunnyvale and co founder of LavaAmp, maker of an inexpensive, pocket size pcr machine. I am pleased to have Joseph and Dr. Tomasz Sablinski, a speaker at the conference, on the program today to talk about the upcoming summit.

Podcast Sponsor:Laboratory Product Sales

Dan Vorhaus, JD, Editor, GenomicsLawReport.com, Bio and Contact Info

Listen (17:14) Interview with Dan Vorhaus

Listen (5:43) Myriad Update 1: Details of the decision

Listen (2:46) Myriad Update 2: Judges disagree on gene patent issue

Listen (0:51) Myriad Update 3: Justice Lourie: Cleavage fundamentally alters the DNA

Listen (3:17) Myriad Update 4: Justice Moore: It takes congress or the Supreme Court

Listen (1:45 Myriad Update 5: Justice Bryson's dissent

Listen (0;38) Myriad Update 6: Most likely to be repealed

Listen (0:38) Myriad Update 7: Patents to expire soon

Listen (0:58) Myriad Update 8: What about whole genome sequencing

Kevin Noonan, Ph D, Editor, PatentDocs.org, Bio and Contact Info

Listen (11:11) Interview with Kevin Noonan

Listen (6:11) Myriad Update 9: Claims all say 'isolated' DNA

Listen (4:03) Myriad Update 10: Won't be settled until Supreme Court weighs in

Our show today is a follow-up on an earlier show about biotechnology and patent law. Last Friday, July 29th, a the Federal Circuit appeals court reversed a lower court’s ruling and upheld the right of Myriad Genetics to patent the BRCA genes. The BRCA1 and 2 genes account for most inherited forms of breast and ovarian cancers. Women who test positive using Myriad's gene test, have an 82 percent higher risk of breast cancer and a 44 percent higher risk of ovarian cancer. The gene patent issue was decided 2 to 1. The court ruled unanimously that Myriad’s method for screening potential therapies was patentable but that their method for analyzing DNA sequences did not involve sufficient transformation, and thus could not be patented.

It is anticipated that the case will be further appealed, either to the full bench of appeals or to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Read Dan Vorhaus' analysis over at www.genomicslawreport.com.

Read an in-depth analysis of Judge Moore's decision written by Kevin Noonan at www.patentdocs.org.

Guests:

Dan Vorhaus, JD, Editor, Genomics Law Report Bio and Contact Info John Conley, PhD,, UNC, Chapel Hill Bio and Contact Info

Listen (23:15) Dan V & John C - Myriad Case

Listen (03:29) Dan V & John C - Stanford v Roche

Listen (03:03) Dan V & John C - America Invents Act

Kevin Noonan, PhD, Bio and Contact Info

Listen (03:11) Kevin N - PatentDocs Blog

Listen (09:40) Kevin N - Myriad Case

Listen (12:55) Kevin N - Patent Reform

Listen (05:46) Kevin N - Stanford v Roche

On June 6, the Supreme Court handed down a decision on Stanford v. Roche. The case is about who owned the patent for a PCR-based HIV detection kit. Dr. Mark Holodniy joined Stanford as a research fellow, and when he did, he signed a Patent Agreement stating that he will assign the right to inventions resulting from his employment at Stanford. In 88, Cetus began to collaborate with scientists at Stanford to test their HIV technology. Because Holodniy was unfamiliar with PCR, his supervisor arranged for him to conduct research at Cetus. The condition for this would be that Holodniy sign a Visitor’s Confidentiality Agreement which stated that he did presently assign to Cetus any right to any invention made as a consequence of his access to Cetus. So which agreement would hold? Stanford sued Roche (who bought out Cetus) for infringing. The Supreme Court, however, decided against Stanford upholding the agreement with Roche/Cetus as the valid one. The case has been somewhat complicated by a piece of legislation called the Baye-Dole Act which gives universities intellectual property control of their inventions that result from federally funded projects.

Today we have two interviews--the first with Dan Vorhaus and John Conley, the second with Kevin Noonan--to discuss the Stanford Roche decision as well as the ongoing Myriad Genetics which deals with the patentability of genes. We also discuss patent reform legislation before congress called the America Invents Act.