Thursday, January 25, 2007

CapitolWeekly on stem cells: deja vu all over again?

In an article entitled Stem Cell Reality Check and published Jan. 23, Malcolm Maclachlan noted the inconsistencies in outlook between the patent royalty projections of Stanford's Laurence Baker and those of Berkeley's Richard Gilbert. Interestingly, IPBiz had made the same points in a post published January 14. IPBiz notes CapitolWeekly didn't copy an earlier IPBiz post on Professor Noll's paper suggesting that large royalties were unlikely, possibly because Noll didn't explicitly mention, or comment upon, Baker's study.

Within the January 23 article is the text: "The study finds that stem cell research could be good for the people of California," Gilbert said. "But it is probably not going to make a lot of money for the people of California."

The January 23 article also says: This coming November, New York voters will decide on a $1 billion bond for stem cell research. In neighboring New Jersey, they'll vote on $500 million. [IPBiz hadn't heard this was included on NJ's ballot for 2007?!? IPBiz notes the Jersey Journal said on 12 Jan 07: TRENTON - Plans to ask New Jersey voters in November to approve borrowing at least $230 million for stem cell research will be considered this week by legislators who have promoted taxpayer investment into the potentially groundbreaking work. Voter approval would boost plans by Gov. Jon S. Corzine and Democrats who control the Legislature to make New Jersey a stem cell research leader, but would also increase state debt that has nearly doubled since 2000 to $29.7 billion. An article by David Chen in the New York Times on 15 Dec. 06 had stated: By comfortable margins, the State Senate and the General Assembly authorized borrowing $270 million to build the state's first stem-cell research centers in New Brunswick, Newark and Camden. Gov. Jon S. Corzine said on Thursday that he would enthusiastically sign it. Supporters hope the investment, paid for with the state's unused bonding capacity, will pay off with the recruitment of top researchers and the promise of federal funds should the Bush administration's ban on financing for embryonic stem-cell research be lifted.
"What edge California thought they had, they've lost it," Mr. Cohen said.

Maclachlan didn't mention the Rutgers study about large stem cell royalties for NJ.

The January 23 article also states: On Tuesday, the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation [WARF] bowed to widespread pressure and loosened its licensing policies for three stem cell-related patents it owns, potentially giving up on royalties worth millions. Evidently, Maclachlan hasn't heard about 35 USC 271(e)(1) or Merck v. Integra.


Post a Comment

<< Home