Gary Myles’ Intellectual Property Discussion Series, Part 2

Stay tuned for our second event in a series of discussions involving intellectual property and biology. Conducting your own experiments using new molecular and genetic technologies in a citizen science environment seems innocent, but it may have legal implications, especially if it involves commercialization.

Gary Myles, Ph.D. and attorney at law will give a lecture and host a discussion about the Supreme Court’s Decision on the Association for Molecular Pathology vs Myriad Genetics, Inc case. In this ruling it was decided that isolated DNA that does not exist alone in nature can be patented. While you are legally able to look at your DNA in your own body and cells, cloned sequences and cDNAs may be legally protected.

What does this mean for the citizen scientist? DNA that has been isolated by traditional methods may be licensable, patentable material. This means that if you find a fascinating vector in your beer, yogurt, kimchi, or other microbe-driven food product, there is a chance you may not legally be allowed to reproduce it, even though these microbes reproduce and amplify this DNA naturally.

Sound complicated? If you’re anything like me, I have no clue about the legal implications of basic biological tinkering. Yet, we are still legally responsible! Gary Myles Ph.D. and attorney at law has extensive knowledge in this field. Take the opportunity to get clarification on this issue and ask questions! Be informed!

EDIT: Unfortunately we had to reschedule this week’s session but stay tuned for an announcement about a new date!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.