Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Thursday December 08 2016, @03:15AM   Printer-friendly
from the just-like-editing-video dept.

It looks like video patent licensing agency MPEG LA is targeting the highly promising genome editing techniques of using CRISPR-Cas9. They are proposing to bundle all the relevant patents so that interested parties can rest assured they have all the necessary patents while developing their products. CRISPR-Cas9 is a set of enzymes and RNA guides that enable precise targeting of genomic regions which is quite handy in research and medicine. Note that there already is a litigation in this matter between Broad-Harvard and Berkeley.

From the press release:

"CRISPR's wide range of potential applications in medicine and agriculture, and the steadily increasing volume of intellectual property in the field, point to the need for a one-stop licensing platform to reduce litigation risk and provide efficiency, transparency and predictability to scientists and businesses worldwide," said MPEG LA President and CEO Larry Horn. "Our worldwide licensing infrastructure, trusted reputation for independence, experience, impartiality and results with patent pools, and relationships with industry and academia, including life sciences, position MPEG LA to deliver a licensing solution for the life sciences market as it did with digital video for the consumer electronics market."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by takyon on Thursday December 08 2016, @04:48AM

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Thursday December 08 2016, @04:48AM (#438621) Journal

    Smaller players can freely license MPEG video patents. For example, if you sell less than 100,000 HEVC products per year, you pay nothing [mpegla.com].

    Smaller players in the CRISPR scenario don't care about licensing, but benefit from having more information available and more science out in the open. You don't need to license a patent to conduct amateur science or get a research grant. Licensing comes into play only after you want to sell a drug or whatever. That's when the big players come in, and assume the liabilities of selling a CRISPR produced drug or lifeform.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @05:21AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @05:21AM (#438628)

    My bet is they are realizing they will quickly be irrelevant. As their key patents are expiring. So they need a fresh group to mine.

  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @07:32AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 08 2016, @07:32AM (#438657)

    > Smaller players can freely license MPEG video patents. For example, if you sell less than 100,000 HEVC products per year, you pay nothing.

    That's only hevc, mpeg2 was not like that.
    They did it because they are afraid of competition from the likes of vp9.
    Don't count on them being so generous if they corner the market on crispr patents.