Alzheimer's Research Disrupted By Ridiculous Patent Disputeby Mike Masnick, Techdirt
Apr. 06, 2011
Phoenix Rioter Gets Shot In The Groin With Pepper Ball After Kicking Gas Can At Police
Girls Threatened For Wearing Trump Hat At DC College
Report: Ivanka, Jared Helped Forced Out Bannon - 'His Far-Right Views Clashed With Their Jewish Faith'
Baltimore: Robert E. Lee Statue Replaced With Statue of Pregnant Black Woman
Report: Bannon Eyes Starting Fox News Competitor
We keep hearing stories of important healthcare research being disrupted by patents, and the latest, as pointed out by Slashdot, involves an organization called the Alzheimer's Institute of America... which happened to buy some patents on a DNA sequence, and is now suing or threatening to sue a ton of researchers in the space. Amusingly, AIA presents itself as an organization committed to supporting Alzheimer's research, when it appears the organization is more focused on shaking down researchers.
The key lawsuit at issue is the one filed against the Jackson Laboratory, which provides special lab mice for Alzheimer's research and is funded by the NIH. But AIA is pissed off that it's not getting a cut:
The AIA is alleging that Jackson infringed on its Swedish mutation patent, and others, when the lab distributed 22 strains of mice with the mutation to researchers; the organization is seeking unspecified damages.AIA has tried to defend its actions by saying that it's okay to use the mouse models for academic research, but you can't make money from it. The Jackson Laboratory points out that it's not making money from the models, and that it only got some money for the models which doesn't even cover the costs associated with the models.
But the key issue is that as a lab that relies on philanthropy and grants to operate, the last thing it can afford is a costly patent battle. Instead, it's asked the NIH to fight on its behalf. The lab could just settle, but the AIA is demanding that a settlement would involve Jackson handing over researchers' names who received the models, and Jackson finds that handing out such information would be "repugnant."
There are all sorts of reasons why researchers are doing this kind of work on Alzheimer's. Patents have very little to do with it. Many people would genuinely like to find ways to prevent, delay or (one can hope) cure the disease. But it appears that patents are seriously interfering with that mission. That these efforts to block research are coming from an organization that purports to support Alzheimer's research is nothing short of sickening.