Re: [DIYbio] Re: DIYbio projects

On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 8:41 PM, John Griessen <john@industromatic.com> wrote:
>> Instead, we come up with "Free-Libre Open Source" DNA and methods, which
>> can be infinitely derivatised without fear of patent-trolling. It's
>> elementary, and obvious: this is where we're headed, and distractions
>> down patent-trollable dead-ends will only waste a lot of our time and
>> money as a community.
>
> Yes, finding "just as good" non-patented methods, then locking them open
> somehow, (publishing solid prior art), would be a better test
> of open/free-licensing than for manufactured things,
> since it is in the process patent realm.  I've not heard any talk of
> that in the open hardware crowd.

"Locking them open" in Europe is simply a matter of disclosing, full
stop. Published material cannot be patented if the application is
filed after publication date.

In the US it's a bit tricker, since a patent can be filed up to 12
months from the date of first disclosure. One thing that might work is
filing a provisional patent application ($125), then just letting that
naturally expire (it's only valid for a year) and not following up on
it. But I am not a lawyer and it has been several years since I've had
anything personally to do with patent law, so anyone who wants to try
that sort of thing should consult an actual lawyer.

Fun fact: BitTorrent is not patented. Bram Cohen disclosed the
algorithm publicly (on a mailing list), and never bothered to file a
patent, plus no one else patented it out from under him within the
12-month window.

Cheers,
--mlp

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To post to this group, send email to diybio@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio?hl=en.