If a Patented Gene Appears in a Song, Who Gets the Royalty?
Sure, genetic music was the out-of-left-field offshoot of the Human Genome Project, but we can't deny that the field -- such as it is -- has shown surprising longevity. If you have a free minute, check out this newly issued patent. It covers "music generated by decoding and transcribing genetic information within a DNA sequence into a music signal having melody and harmony," according to the abstract. The inventors listed are a couple of lawyers (hence the title of this post).
Comments
Oh, those lawyers! Too bad, they don't really invent anything, they only use somebody else's stuff.
The music derived from nucleic acid sequences was created long time ago. Back in 1995 a tape with such music was available and distributed at the international conference on the structure and function of the ribosome in Victoria, British Columbia. Anybody who wanted could get a tape at the conference. The music was not a timeless masterpiece, but it was cohesive and even somewhat pleasing. The tape was in 1995, clearly the idea was even before that.
Comment by: Db1455 | 12:57 PM CT July 30
Boooooo!!! Hissss!!!
Do these lawyers really plan to litigate against patient advocates like this one:
http://www.sophiasgarden.org/programs_music.html
Boooooo!
We have their names, maybe we should track them down and ask them?
Comment by: jasonbobe | 1:17 PM CT July 30
I am outraged. So called IP law has gotten way way way out of hand. What right do they have to a patent? Are they protecting their ability to be compensated for research and development costs? I doubt it. If someone paid the processing fee for a patent before anyone else to obtain rights to... say.. the synthesizer. Should that person be entitled to royalties every time a human being hears a song with a electronically generated melody? By precedent the U.S. Pat&Tm office says yes. In the near future middle class people wont be able to walk outside their home. As strolling past trees and bushes will generate expensive costs owed to lawyers and patent holders.
Comment by: Nemo | 12:40 AM CT July 31
I'm not a patent expert, but it seems to me that there is considerable prior art in this field - the patent office may therefore not be able to give the lawyers much in the way of claims.
The patent office obviously doesn't really look into any of the claims.
http://whozoo.org/mac/Music /
http://algoart.com /
This guys been doing dna transcribed computer music for a while now.
Comment by: seesixty | 2:20 PM CT July 31
Enter your username (email) and password to post a comment.