|
|
|
|
|
Biotech
- Vers un engineering génétique en "open source" ? - Should
life be Open Source?...
Open
Source Life
Download Aborted! Blog 21/06/04
"What happens when a bio-cracker unleashes a plant virus
on all the wheat in North America, and the genetic code to
"Wheat 2.0" is closed-source, patented code owned by a
corporation? Should life be Open Source?"
"...I'm not a lawyer or biologist, but it may be interesting
to compare this issue to what's going on in the software industry.
There are some clear similarities between genetic code (the
blueprint for lifeforms) and software code (the instructions that
define a computer program). The Economist recently published an article
on the subject.
One could argue that the biggest difference between genetic code
and software code is that one is biologically based and the other
is based on logic. A few years ago, that argument might have held
up, but the biotech and nanotech industries have really blurred
the lines. Something could be both a computer and a life form.
Perhaps the greatest remaining difference between genetic code and
software code is the history of its ownership. Software code is a
20th century invention, while genetic code has surrounded us long
before we knew it existed.
Software code was freely shared between people until the late
1970's, when corporations discovered they could make money with a
proprietary model. In that model, customers can purchase or
license a binary product, but not the actual source code. Today,
the balance of power is moving to "Open Source", an
ownership system where people are forced to share in exchange for
the benefits of higher quality software, and more freedom in
general. More and more people are discovering that sharing just
makes sense, especially when you get into issues of security and
reliability.
Genetic code has never really been owned. Or has it? Most people
believe the universe didn't just pop out of nowhere; that there
was/is some form of creator at a higher level or dimension. I
happen to believe in God, but my point here is that something
other than life created life; We did not create ourselves.
Therefore, if genetic code is owned, we are not the owners. We
didn't create the prior art.
But it goes beyond strictly the ownership. It's clear that the
genetic code to, say, an apple tree, has been explicitly shared
with me and everyone on the planet. I can plant an apple tree, but
it's unfair for me to restrict my neighbor from taking advantage
of the same genetic code if a seed falls on his land.
|
If I sell my apples, my customers are free to plant the seeds contained within
each apple. I don't own the invention itself, but I'm free to make
as many instances (trees) as I want, and I can't prevent others
from doing the same. It's a lot like software's GPL
license.
So what happens when somebody takes that publically-owned (or
God-owned, depending on your point of view) invention and patents it? Well, you can't do that in the software industry (not with
GPL'd code, anyway). But isn't that exactly what the biotech
companies are doing? They start off with publically-owned code,
and use it as the basis for a proprietary product..."
"...What happens when a bio-cracker unleashes a plant virus
on all the wheat in North America, and the genetic code to
"Wheat 2.0" is closed-source, patented code controlled
by a corporation?
When you think about genetic code as software, it's hard to
understand why farmers would willingly subject themselves to the
kind of vendor lock-in and licensing that has squelched innovation
in the software industry for the past two decades. Maybe they're
still in the honeymoon phase of this relationship, or maybe
economic factors give them little choice..."
Voir
également, See also :
Experts
worry that synthetic biology may spawn biohackers
EETimes 29/06/04
|
Nous
vous proposons les liens ci-dessus pour votre recherche et
ces liens ne sauraient en aucun cas exprimer, évoquer ou refléter
une quelconque position de Strategic Road sur le
sujet. Certains de ces liens peuvent avoir une durée de vie
limitée et ne plus être accessibles au moment où ils sont
consultés. We offer this links for your
research and therefore they should not be construed as
evocating or reflecting any position of Strategic Road. Some
links can have a limited lifetime and may not be accessed
anymore where you'll click them.
|
Contactez-nous
si vous désirez acquérir une licence vous
autorisant à effectuer une copie de cette page sur votre DD ou
Intranet
|
|
|
