Stem Cell Research: all about money?
A Sept. 14 article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch titled Stem cell proponents cite money mentions a report prepared for Missouri Coalition for Lifesaving Cures which states Missouri could lose billions of dollars if the initiative [Amendment 2] fails.
There is a quote attributed to Joseph Haslag, a University of Missouri-Columbia economist: "People have to make a decision based on how they value stem cell research -- we're only bringing the economics piece of it. You just want them to be well-informed. …"… We're not trying to say this is more or less important."
One recalls in the days before the vote on Proposition 71, there was an economic projection from a Stanford University professor concerning patent royalties that would come to California. These days there is greater concern with how much money California entities might have to pay to folks in Wisconsin (WARF) over the Thomson patents. People in Missouri might want to think about that, also.
The californiastemcellreport blog mentioned the possibility of action in the next month by the USPTO on the re-exam request on the Thomson patents. IPBiz predicts the PubPat/FTCR arguments won't cut the mustard. Recall, however, that the USPTO can add other references and arguments. Something along this line happened in the early part of the Eolas patent re-exam (technically director-ordered but flavored with W3C input). The USPTO flamed the W3C arguments, but made a few of its own, but ultimately the patent survived re-exam.
There is a quote attributed to Joseph Haslag, a University of Missouri-Columbia economist: "People have to make a decision based on how they value stem cell research -- we're only bringing the economics piece of it. You just want them to be well-informed. …"… We're not trying to say this is more or less important."
One recalls in the days before the vote on Proposition 71, there was an economic projection from a Stanford University professor concerning patent royalties that would come to California. These days there is greater concern with how much money California entities might have to pay to folks in Wisconsin (WARF) over the Thomson patents. People in Missouri might want to think about that, also.
The californiastemcellreport blog mentioned the possibility of action in the next month by the USPTO on the re-exam request on the Thomson patents. IPBiz predicts the PubPat/FTCR arguments won't cut the mustard. Recall, however, that the USPTO can add other references and arguments. Something along this line happened in the early part of the Eolas patent re-exam (technically director-ordered but flavored with W3C input). The USPTO flamed the W3C arguments, but made a few of its own, but ultimately the patent survived re-exam.
posted by Lawrence B. Ebert at 10:16 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home