Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/threads/so-much-for-innovation-in-dna-sequencing.7383/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021770
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

So much for innovation in DNA sequencing

Sad.

But maybe it was to be expected. Maybe we'll just have to wait 20 years until stuff gets off-patent, like what happened with 3d printing, and than innovation will return.

Hopefully not.
 
Sadly, it more and more looks like the company with the best lawyers and biggest war chest wins, and everyone else looses. The current IP system world wide needs a major rework from top to bottom.
 
I've been pondering aggressive pursuit of IP rights in our industry (eg RamBus and QCOM) and why/if that is different from this case. I think it is somewhat different because semi components aren't at the top of the food chain so don't disable competition in the end product. But Illumina is at the top of the food chain so effectively stifles everything below by their actions (who wants to build a product for one customer). What do you guys think?
 
I don't think Illumina's patents will hold up for all the do is shrink previous and obvious processes with a few changes. Sort of like the first person to build a valve, controls all valves and faucets under a patent. Shrinking a well known process is not new and never has been. If they have a new creative way of shrinking a process, that is a different story and deserves some protection. It still must be non obvious to PROFESIONALS IN THE FIELD.
 
Back
Top