I know one thing that has been used for patent rights: National Security National Security could include significant and or expensive health impacts that would degrade the performance of a nation in decision making, resources, and economy.
If the form of epilepsy mentioned above is sufficiently prevalent and is becoming more prevalent, this could be an example of a national security item and a more efficient form of testing would have to be made available. In this case, a non negotiable royalty, if it has to be that way, could be paid to the patent holder.
This is only something I am aware of and needs to be looked into further content wise and scopewise.
Marc
· 1 year ago
Why do people support governments that allow genes (or mathematical formulas or ...) to be patented? Genes that are not modified and were not created. These are not inventions.
That is the problem, not that some one uses the law as it was intended.
Andrew Yates
· 1 year ago
"Why do people support governments?" Agree or disagree, I dare you to "opt out" of your government. Try it, and see what happens.
Andrew Yates
· 1 year ago
If you want to put your money where you mouth is, email Josh here and Think Gene, and maybe he'll tell you how to buy the supplies and make the primers to do these tests for free / at cost. You could drive around in a van providing free genetic tests to save babies, "liberating the science," for probably less than a few thousand dollars US. It sounds like a good trustafarian grad student project. Fight the man, save babies, hide behind the family trust when your antics piss off powerful people who would crush you otherwise... yah. Much better than "saving the Earth" by smoking organic pot or whatever.
All Comments
National Security could include significant and or expensive health impacts that would degrade the performance of a nation in decision making, resources, and economy.
If the form of epilepsy mentioned above is sufficiently prevalent and is becoming more prevalent, this could be an example of a national security item and a more efficient form of testing would have to be made available. In this case, a non negotiable royalty, if it has to be that way, could be paid to the patent holder.
This is only something I am aware of and needs to be looked into further content wise and scopewise.
That is the problem, not that some one uses the law as it was intended.