Hey, there! Log in / Register

Berkeley not very genial with Harvard, MIT over biotech patents

The Harvard Crimson has the details in the dispute over who discovered a particular gene-changing technique first; Berkeley is using words like "pattern of deception" and "cherry-picked data" in a complaint filed with the US Patent and Trademark Office. Harvard and MIT volleys back with words like "baseless."

Neighborhoods: 
Topics: 
Free tagging: 

Ad:

Do you like how UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

a music sckool with gene-editing labs ?

up
Voting closed 14

Not Berklee College of Music!

up
Voting closed 16

BSM with gene editing, now THAT would be awesome! Reanimated John Bonham with two more arms to start with, regenerative soul serum to Nashville, STAT! Count me in!

up
Voting closed 15

Charpentier et al at Berkeley wrote about the technique first and had CRISPR cas9 stuff working in a test tube.

A few months later Broad claimed success in editing cells of mammals and filed for their patents with the key trick being that Broad paid USPTO for fast-track review on the patent.

In 2014 Broad was issued the patents and the shitstorm began.

The fight over this has all the things you need for a proper slug fest. Big commercial implications, lots of mainstream media attention ("CRISPR babies!") but the individual involved also have skin in the game because the basic discovery behind cas9 editing is very likely to win a Nobel Prize one of these years

up
Voting closed 21

Who funded this research?

up
Voting closed 10