Slashdot Log In
Google Accused of Bio-piracy
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu Mar 30, 2006 09:56 AM
from the ahoy-maties-turn-over-those-ribonucleic-acids-if-you-please dept.
from the ahoy-maties-turn-over-those-ribonucleic-acids-if-you-please dept.
Simon Phillips writes "ZDNet is reporting
that Google has been accused of being the 'biggest
threat to genetic privacy' this year for its plan to create a searchable database of genetic information. From the article: 'Google was presented with an award as part of the Captain
Hook Awards for Biopiracy in Curitiba, Brazil, this week. The organisers allege that Google's collaboration with genomic research institute J. Craig Venter to create a searchable online database of all the genes on the planet is a clear example of biopiracy.'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
May I suggest.... (Score:5, Funny)
Torrents. (Score:5, Funny)
Torrent stream (Score:5, Funny)
[Apologies. Crude, but I couldn't pass up the opportunity.]
Parent
Stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
There are much better things to go after google for if you don't like them (*cough*censorhip*in*China*France*Germany*US*Unwa
The monopolization of genetic information is a serious issue - people are trying to do stupid things - like attempting to apply copy protection measures (both physical and legal) to life. Life attempts to copy itself & tradional copyright / patent laws should not apply.
Unfortunately, these awards look like shameless self-promotion rather then a serious attempt to tackle the problem.
Yup. Sounds to me... (Score:5, Insightful)
Sounds to me like these guys are a bunch of kooks who are attacking any large company who uses the words "genetic" and "database" in the same sentence.
Google is one of the biggest, so they automatically attack.
Parent
Re:Yup. Sounds to me... (Score:5, Funny)
I read this and said WTF?
then I read teh story and said WTF?
then I read your comment and said Ahhh!
-nB
Parent
Re:Yup. Sounds to me... (Score:2)
DRM my ass (Score:2, Funny)
Re:DRM my ass (Score:3, Funny)
Aaargghhh! (Score:2)
Re:Aaargghhh! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Aaargghhh! (Score:3, Informative)
This makes the whole assertion even more stupid, since no country/ethnic group/publicity-seeking self-proclaimed human-rights experts can claim to own or control or have rights to that pool of DNA.
It is a very odd stunt indeed. But I guess there is an appreciating audience for this stu
Re:Stupid. (Score:2)
I just patented a molecule. I has two atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen. It has been known in the past as "water". Anyone who uses it in any form owes me royalties. I also have a patent pending on unique arrangements of protons, neutrons and electrons in 92 distinct groupings. I expect to get a patent soon and then collect money from everybody for EVERYTHING that uses any of these.
Re:Stupid. (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Stupid. (Score:4, Insightful)
"Theft of knowledge" is, of course, a term which refers to "intellectual property", except that here obvioulsy a "collective IP" held by a culture is assumed. Google is obviously accused for violating this second part.
But independent of what one may think about the concepts of IP in general, and of the concept of IP held by a culture in particular, there's a nice contradiction in the very definition:
The first sentence states that monopolization of that knowledge is bad. The second one states that not granting a monopoly to those cultures is bad.
In short, the term "biopiracy" is ill-defined.
Parent
Re:Stupid. (Score:4, Insightful)
I didn't read that as what he was saying. It looked more like he was attacking Monsanto, ADM, et al for going to a country like Mexico, taking samples of the corn people have been planting there for centuries, patenting those seeds, and then suing the farmers for doing what they have been doing for hundreds of years to force them to buy GM seeds that they can't replant. He's not saying the Mexican farmers should be the only ones using those seeds. He's saying agritech companies shouldn't be able to sue them for continuing to use those seeds just because the company got an absurd patent on centuries-old technology.
Think Microsoft, RIAA, SCO, MPAA, etc. are evil? What happens to our bits is nothing compared to what's happening to our food... [thefutureoffood.com]
Parent
Re:Stupid. (Score:5, Informative)
I was thinking the same thing. If Google is putting this information online for all to use in research, how is that a bad thing?
As a computer scientist who has been working in bioinformatics for over 3 years now, I've been calling for the "googlification" of genomics information ever since I discovered what a mess the community really is. You would not believe how many different databases, with different indexing systems there are out there. To actually do any useful research you first have to spend a month or two trying to make the pieces of data fit together.
Our lab, and many other labs, actually have entire projects dedicated to finding ways to piece these disjoint datasets together for effective quering. This is a huge under-addressed problem in genomics.
And genomic data goes far beyond just the human genome, that's only one small part. If someone could organize all the genomic formation across all the hundreds of genomes which have been sequenced, it would be a very very useful tool. The other half of the problem in genomics databases is half of them are NOT free and available for researchers without paying licensing fees. And to me, a far better use of research dollars is on actual research rather then paying licensing fees for data which was probably originally discovered with public research dollars to begin with. So if Google can open up all this sequence information, and more importantly the related information downstream from just the raw sequences such as pathway information, all the more power to them!
The truth is most genomes ARE already available through sites like NCBI, you can download hundreds of eukaryotic, prokaryotic, and fungi genomes freely already. You can already find similarities between sequences across species through tools such as BLAST, or find orthologs across species with tools such as Ortholuge. I would assume what Google is doing is creating a better way to organize this. And Dr. Venter is already known for trying to find as many diverse genomic sequences as he can, and usually not human ones.
This definitely seems to be panic over nothing, over something which could help genomic research a lot, and ultimately find better ways to protect humans against the nasty bugs out there.
I for one welcome our new Google overlords.
Parent
Bio-piracy? (Score:5, Insightful)
I recognise the notion of piracy as in copying material which has been copyrighted, conducted by a 'pirate'. But I prefer the term copyright infringement.
But what the heck is 'Bio-piracy'? Because privacy and piracy sound vaguely familiar isn't reason enough, IMHO. Naming the awards 'the Captain Hook awards' seems even more facetious.
From TFA, "Google, in cooperation with Craig Venter, are developing plans to make all of our genomes Googlable to facilitate the brave new world of private genetically-tailored medicines" does not equal piracy, IMHO.
And to tackle their argument, they have not outlined why genetically tailored medicines are bad, not why holding them in private hands is wrong. And private means exactly what? The copyright to GNU/Linux is held in private hands. And Google giving public access to work done by the human genome sequence project seems a lot better than letting all research in the hands of a very small amount of drug companies, those that are most interested in profiting from keeping information 'secret'.
Re:Bio-piracy? (Score:2)
Pirate ! (Score:2)
Re:Bio-piracy? (Score:2, Funny)
No worries, dude, everyone knows that Ninjas are Pirate's natural enemies, and those Code Ninjas at Google are top notch.
Re:Bio-piracy? Yes, Bio-piracy indeed. (Score:5, Interesting)
That's what they classify as bio-piracy. Steal native elements from a country and patent them as a property of your corporation, then sell it back to that very country or charge for royalties.
Parent
Re:Bio-piracy? Yes, Bio-piracy indeed. (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Avast! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Avast! (Score:2)
It's made of people...
I don't get it (Score:4, Insightful)
correct me if i'm wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait a minute (Score:3, Insightful)
If it is the latter, I don't see a problem.
Re:Wait a minute (Score:2)
I don't understand (Score:5, Insightful)
What do Bio-pirates say? (Score:5, Funny)
Ouch, sorry about that
Where's the Competition? (Score:2, Informative)
pure spin (Score:2)
2. google
3. big pharma
4. profit!
Except that genbank already does that for free.
The ultimate gatekeeper of your genetic privacy is YOU. What isn't in the database can not be googled.
Riiiight, so... (Score:5, Insightful)
RE: need a new keyboard... again. (Score:5, Insightful)
This made me spit out my coffee... Arrrrg!
There's a balance between communication and proliferation. There really is.
If a person is being tested for a degree on material, they shouldn't have access to the answers. But if a person is working in the field, they *should*. And if a person is curious, they probably should too.
This is just taking it too far. There may be justifiable reasons why evil corperation X in country Z shouldn't have access to information Gamma, but what real difference will it make if they can google for it. There's a much greater chance of them screwing something up if they're evil than getting something right.
Weight that against the 1000's of corperations/individuals/research groups also looking at information Gamma and doing something promising, and google is, on average, doing a good service.
I have to google for facts that make our research institute run literally daily. Usually its simple stuff like " what the hell is bentonite and how much can we put in this beaker without breaking something." or "what the heck is this photoflo stuff. It works great for this demonstration experiment, but we can't find the bottle..." a short google later, and we have a home brew wetting agent made, in the tank, and making the flow over a glass edge laminar just as we wanted.
Biopiracy? Please: Communication is a *vital* part of the scientific method. Shure, 1/1000 it might bite someone in the ass. But without modern communication pathways, we wouldn't have all these cool toys or long lives in which to buy more toys.
Re: need a new keyboard... again. (Score:4, Interesting)
The first thing you learn, is the internet is not a reliable source of research information. Have fun on the day you do that google for how much bentonite to put into the beaker, and find out the paper you got it from on the internet was only a draft, not peer reviewed, and had a decimal point in the wrong place.
Parent
Re: need a new keyboard... again. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why do
There is a *lot* of information you can get from reading any single article, website, response, etc. But any engineer worth his/her degree would *never* rely on one source. Even stuff you see in peer reviewed articles can be wrong. (I've seen it!)
However, there is something to be learned even from the wrong article. Sure, I didn't go into this in my comment. I'm sorry I assumed that my point would come across without an explanation.
An example:
Looking up laser howtos the other day for revitalizing our laser lab. Was googleing for hints and docs about a few Spectra Physics argon ion lasers. (Series 2000 and a Stabilitte 2011). One of the first startup procedures I found for the 2000 was from a college graduate student physics lab.
I had to ignore the startup (and shut down too, since that was even worse.) but the howto had one of the clearest tuning procedures I've seen for getting a dummy to safely align the laser.
Should I condem google for providing me with a howto that could result in an incident if there was a water leak? No. I could only blame myself for being stupid.
Parent
Correct me if I'm wrong... (Score:2, Interesting)
Increased interest in a project such as the Genome project would help, correct? And what is there to steal really? And who is going to care... I highly doubt that the kind of people who would download part of the Genome project and the people who download movies illegal are anywhere near the same breed. Sometimes I think people are just picking on Google, hehe. Google is simply going for their mission statement I suppose... I think it would
What a load of crap! (Score:3, Insightful)
They got it backwards (Score:3, Insightful)
What Google is planning certainly isn't going to stifle innovation like gene patents will--for if lack of patents ever harmed research governments can and would supply funds for researchers.
Two days early (Score:4, Funny)
People leave their DNA and finger prints wherever they go, and the law is clear that whatever you leave behind is up for grabs. Where is the piracy in making an online searchable database of public-domain information?
It's not biopiracy! (Score:2)
--Rob
This is an extremely complex issue (Score:4, Interesting)
... from which many ethical and legal issues can and do arise.
TGFG (Score:4, Interesting)
That's kind of like getting a patent for the number pi. That would actually be a good one. If you have the patent to the decimal sequence that makes up pi, you could really argue that you have a patent on everything, including every genetic sequence. Theoretically, pi will contain every conceivable sequence of digits somewhere in its infinitely long sequencey and thus, anything that can be encoded as a sequence of digits (movies, music, books, genes), can be found somewhere in pi. Therefore, the patent holder for pi is the patent holder for everything. QED.
Whose profits will be reduced if Googel proceeds? (Score:3, Informative)
The Human Genome Project was a collaborative effort, largely funded by government and public sources. The agencies involved in the research, however, seem to have a vested interest in keeping the data private, even going so far as to patent genetic sequences (isn't there "prior art" for all of my DNA? I call them "parents"). Freely available information, while often valuable, has no resale value. Can this be the true cause of The "Coalition Against Biopiracy" issueing what seems more like a political slander campaign than a genuine warning of wrongdoing?
Perhaps we should ask:
IPBN - Indigenous Peoples Biodiversity Network
P.O. Box 567
Cusco, Peru
Phone: +51 84 24-5021
email: ipbn@web.net
SEARICE - South East Asia Regional Inititiaves in Community Empowerment
Unit 331, Eagle Court Condominium
26 Matalino Street, Central District
Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines
Phone: (63 2) 433-7182, 433-2067
Fax: (63 2) 922-6710
email: searice@searice.org.ph
web: http://www.searice.org.ph/ [searice.org.ph]
ETC Group - Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration
431 Gilmour St, Second Floor,
Ottawa, ON Canada K2P 0R5
Tel: 1(613)241-2267
Fax: 1(613)241-2506
email: etc@etcgroup.org
web: http://www.etcgroup.org/ [etcgroup.org]
Biopiracy = terrorism? (Score:3, Interesting)
Periodic Table
Protien Family
Acidic/Alkalinity
Ionization Excitement
DNA strand markers
All are tools in which we make our stepping stones into a better or worse life for us and others (not always in that order).
If worsen quality of life can be had, then it becomes an issue of "scientific terrorism" and it should be controlled (however fluid it may be).
If it improves the quality of our life, then it is "scientific knowledge."
I'm ok with Bio-piracy of DNA until someone comes along and "worsen" things for humanity. Take "target DNA elimination" for example. Can anyone say bio-ethnic cleansing and getting rid of cancer-causing cells in the same sentence, yet?
Re:What the frell? Genetic info? (Score:2)
Re:What the frell? Genetic info? (Score:2)
I think it's already the 31 in New-Zealand for example.
Those damned timezones !
Re:What the frell? Genetic info? (Score:2)
Re:I do not get it (Score:4, Interesting)
The situation on the group is that Genetically Manipulated stocks are appearing on the market. Point 1) some people have a fear of genes as part of Secrets Man Was Not Meant to Know.
Genetics have great promise: GM foods they can produce high yields, resist pests, drouts, all kinds of things. They could greatly relieve world hunger and all kinds of other stuff.
Point 2) in spite of great promise, we have a patent system in effect here. Companies are scouring the world for certain genetic traits in plants, then patenting them and reselling them. They then "manage their rights" by engineering sterile seeds, or milling the seeds before they provide them to famine-struck regions. So your dirt-poor third world farmer suddenly sees his plants being used, the genes being taken, then sold back in a "BRM-d form" so that the big drunk companies get rich.
Genetic testing can improve people's lives: ask anyone who's had a cancer identified via a mutation; Likewise Genetic therapy.
Point 3) Sure they can save lives, but the human genomes are being patented, and people are making money off of our inherent makeup.
Point 4) Only rich companies and individuals have the means to play with genes this way. So by google putting this information out, they are favoring the exploitation of the poor by the rich.
That's the thought underlying it as near as I can make out: it's a combination of irrational fear of the unknown, outrage at shameless exploitation committed in the name of being humanitarian, perfectly reasonable resistance to the closed nature of information, and populist distrust of the motives of the rich and powerful.
google falls into categories one and four more than two and three, which is why most researchers are confused by the ranking. To the other side, the exploitation and privatization of common goods is part and parcel of the capitalist system.
Personally, I'm in favor of mapping all the genes out. And I've got a lovely mutation I'd love to get rid of.
Parent