Intellectual Property in Synthetic Biology - Enacted Issues of Sharing and Owning |
1.1 This Study
MACOSPOL is about teaching, and developing methods
for social science research, suitable for observing and describing "...
social debate especially, but not exclusively, around technoscientific
issues." (Venturini 2009:1) Drawing from this field of social research, we
use digital research methods and visualization techniques in order to map out,
describe and analyze two fundamentally different intellectual property regimes.
Together these two strategies (open source and patent-pro approaches) –
constituted by their practitioners, advocates and observers – form a
controversy involving public and private economic interests, concerns about
the environment, national security and innovation issues. Practicing synthetic biology is deemed more or less hazardous, or promising, from the perspective of environmentalists, venture capitalists, researchers and many more interested observers (Joy Y. Zhang et.al 2011:3,35)
Lets have a look at some of the main arguments currently occupying synbio-IP-issue space:
"Open source stifles innovation because Intellectual property regimes are crucial for commercialization and for the development of innovative synbio-companies "
"Patent monopolies exclude broad innovative research communities from using patented key biological parts, impeding the pace of science and innovation"
"Open source innovation in synthetic biology increase the possibility of unintended risks (threatening the environment and human health) and deliberate weaponization of biological agents"
Our aim is to visualize and draw attention to the extent by which the Synthetic biology-IP-issue space is infiltrated by different normative articulations and to make visible the relatively invisible actors who bring these different tropes into play. In mapping this highly complex issue we are not seeking closure or consensus. On the contrary we will try to put forward as many actors and arguments as possible to give a chance for others to take stand in the controversy (Venturini 2009:12). To achieve this objective we ask to what extent the open source and patent-pro approaches to synthetic biology research are infiltrated by different normative articulations, ultimately to make a little sense of the social complexity of synthetic biology research and share our findings with others who are interested in this highly controversial politically entangled area of research and technological innovation.
Lets have a look at some of the main arguments currently occupying synbio-IP-issue space:
"Open source stifles innovation because Intellectual property regimes are crucial for commercialization and for the development of innovative synbio-companies "
"Patent monopolies exclude broad innovative research communities from using patented key biological parts, impeding the pace of science and innovation"
"Open source innovation in synthetic biology increase the possibility of unintended risks (threatening the environment and human health) and deliberate weaponization of biological agents"
Our aim is to visualize and draw attention to the extent by which the Synthetic biology-IP-issue space is infiltrated by different normative articulations and to make visible the relatively invisible actors who bring these different tropes into play. In mapping this highly complex issue we are not seeking closure or consensus. On the contrary we will try to put forward as many actors and arguments as possible to give a chance for others to take stand in the controversy (Venturini 2009:12). To achieve this objective we ask to what extent the open source and patent-pro approaches to synthetic biology research are infiltrated by different normative articulations, ultimately to make a little sense of the social complexity of synthetic biology research and share our findings with others who are interested in this highly controversial politically entangled area of research and technological innovation.