In your face California

Parent Cafe
1

<p>Trying to steal from little old Wisconsin.</p>

<p>[Breaking</a> News](<a href=“captimes.com | The Capital Times: Madison WI News”>captimes.com | The Capital Times: Madison WI News)</p>

2

<p>I just find the patening of life saving discoveries kind of sad…its all about the benjamins</p>

3

<p>Without financial incentives there are very few advances. Drug companies need to make money on every new drug too. If you want to count on the government or non-profits to do all the work I suggest you stock up on pain pills because some day you will need them and there will be no cure. Wisconsin charges a very small fee to use their patents. They just want a piece if new wealth is developed using their ideas–just like any other inventor. I’m sure many companies in California have made lots of money–and employed lots of Californians with their own life saving drugs and other inventions.</p>

4

<p>I still don’t understand why an entity is permitted to patent a cell - something that already existed and they didn’t create. I understand patenting drugs and processes that might result but not the actual cell itself. Imagine someone patenting something that’s already part of your body.</p>

<p>A related read - “Next” - by Michael Crichton</p>

5

<p>They patented a process and the lines of stem cells they created just as you can patent many bio organisms from seeds to drugs. Much of the funding for the stem cell work came from the compound warfarin which was another natural substance. The patents on that funded the stem cell work. It is not the naturally existing cells that are patented but the ability to create them at will and the cells resulting from that process…</p>

<p>[Warfarin</a> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warfarin]Warfarin”>Warfarin - Wikipedia)</p>

6

<p>The warfarin is a synthetic so patenting that makes a bit more sense. The patents on the stem cells though are, I think, patents on the cells themselves - not something that was created or synthesized.</p>

<p>Back to wiki -

[Biological</a> patent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_patent]Biological”>Biological patent - Wikipedia)</p>

<p>It still doesn’t seem right to me that someone can patent something that’s already part of me that they didn’t create.</p>

7

<p>The patents cover both to particular cells and the method to isolate them and allow for their future uses. The cell portion is not that important except that the rules of Fed research only allow work using these and some other individual lines isolated elsewhere. UW charges only a cost recovery fee to any university wishing to use the cells. Apparently the USPO did not agree with the assertions of the Cali and NY groups. Europe has little to do with it as their laws are far different than ours on many things.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.warf.org/ipstatus/P98222US.PDF[/url]”>http://www.warf.org/ipstatus/P98222US.PDF&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;