Public Genomics & Intellectual Property
The human genome was sequenced by two competing enterprises: a global consortium of publicly funded researchers and a private company seeking to sell the sequence information it found and/or develop drugs from it. The former was criticized for being slow, unwieldy and politically compromised. The latter was criticized for usurping the public effort, carrying out "science by press release," and failing to make its data publicly available in a timely fashion. While nearly universal celebration accompanied the publication of the complete human genome sequence in 2001, a shelf' s worth of books has been written documenting the contentious competition and the antagonistic approaches of the two groups.
Going forward, genome scientists and policy experts would like to know which model is better for carrying out genome research. Is private-sector research essential to promote innovation or is the public better served by a robust scientific commons, i.e., information and technologies that are placed in public databases, published in the open literature, or widely shared at low cost? Duke' s Center for Public Genomics is endeavoring to understand what combination of the public and the private leads to innovation in the genome sciences in an environment where intellectual property claims are growing ever more complicated. Is it appropriate to patent microarray applications that involve hundreds or thousands of gene probes? In the case of computational algorithms, should commercial gain accrue to the programmer or should the "open source" ethos prevail? And to what extent can universities expect to recoup their investments in genome technology? Maintaining a climate in which innovation can take place will require us to address these issues from a legal and policy perspective. We know that for researchers to maximize the scientific and clinical benefits of genomic information, we must have mechanisms in place to quickly and effectively disseminate data. And to do that, we must understand how intellectual property regimes impinge upon the research process.