Difference between revisions of "Team:Bordeaux/Practices"
Line 126: | Line 126: | ||
<p align="justify">In sciences, the <b>question of intellectual property</b> is recurrent. Concerning synthetic biology, all of the objects used <b>can be patented</b>. Among these are genes, plasmids, biobricks, genetic circuit broads, software modeling of mechanisms etc. Thinking about <b>patentability of live being</b> is very important in synthesis biology because we use living organisms. Apposing a patent allows appropriating a technical invention, as a produce or a process. This statute permits to protect the invention, it’s also called the <b>“invention patent”</b>. To elude an amalgam between creation and scientific discovery, we’ll try to define the difference between these two values. | <p align="justify">In sciences, the <b>question of intellectual property</b> is recurrent. Concerning synthetic biology, all of the objects used <b>can be patented</b>. Among these are genes, plasmids, biobricks, genetic circuit broads, software modeling of mechanisms etc. Thinking about <b>patentability of live being</b> is very important in synthesis biology because we use living organisms. Apposing a patent allows appropriating a technical invention, as a produce or a process. This statute permits to protect the invention, it’s also called the <b>“invention patent”</b>. To elude an amalgam between creation and scientific discovery, we’ll try to define the difference between these two values. | ||
− | |||
<br>We can define a <b>discovery</b> as a revelation of <b>what was previously unknown</b>, but <b>already being</b>. Indeed, the scientific discovery is supported by study publications which are in free access for who wants it. So, we can consider it is a part of the <b>common knowledge</b>, ownerless. However, the <b>creation</b> is a process or a product which brings a solution for a particular problem. So it is a <b>new element</b>, previously a lacking element. An invention is supported by a patent. In our case, in synthetic biology, it can be <b>a whole organism</b>, <b>a gene</b> or <b>a DNA sequence</b>. The National Consultative Ethics Committee (CCNE) try to delimitate those processes, it makes impossible to take ownership of organisms already being, with informations which are just revealed and makes sure that <b>a discovery won’t become an invention</b>. Also, the patentability of an element won’t be possible when it was extracted of its natural environment to live in a synthetic environment, or an element which was reproduced in a synthetic environment, but already naturally being. | <br>We can define a <b>discovery</b> as a revelation of <b>what was previously unknown</b>, but <b>already being</b>. Indeed, the scientific discovery is supported by study publications which are in free access for who wants it. So, we can consider it is a part of the <b>common knowledge</b>, ownerless. However, the <b>creation</b> is a process or a product which brings a solution for a particular problem. So it is a <b>new element</b>, previously a lacking element. An invention is supported by a patent. In our case, in synthetic biology, it can be <b>a whole organism</b>, <b>a gene</b> or <b>a DNA sequence</b>. The National Consultative Ethics Committee (CCNE) try to delimitate those processes, it makes impossible to take ownership of organisms already being, with informations which are just revealed and makes sure that <b>a discovery won’t become an invention</b>. Also, the patentability of an element won’t be possible when it was extracted of its natural environment to live in a synthetic environment, or an element which was reproduced in a synthetic environment, but already naturally being. | ||
Revision as of 19:04, 11 August 2015