KUKU

KU ScholarWorks

  • myKU
  • Email
  • Enroll & Pay
  • KU Directory
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   KU ScholarWorks
    • Law, School of
    • Law School Scholarly Works
    • View Item
    •   KU ScholarWorks
    • Law, School of
    • Law School Scholarly Works
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Open and Proprietary Biological Innovation in Human Genetic Enhancement

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Full-text available at SSRN. See link in this record. (19.67Kb)
    Issue Date
    2009
    Author
    Torrance, Andrew W.
    Publisher
    Washington University School of Law
    Type
    Article
    Version
    http://ssrn.com/abstract=1543884
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Open source has been championed by many scholars as a superior system for promoting innovation, not only in software but latterly in biology. Though software code and genes appear superficially similar in the sense that they both serve as algorithms for the production of specified results, the former may be more conducive to the open source model of innovation than the latter. Nevertheless, if an open source model of genetics were adopted, the model could have significant effects on the future of human genetic enhancement. If open source genetics were unsuccessful or counterproductive in promoting genetic innovation, the result would be slowed discovery and development of genetic enhancements. Yet, if open source genetics were successful in spurring genetic innovation, at least two results would be likely: (1) acceleration in the rate of innovation in new genetic enhancements, and (2) acceleration of the widespread adoption of genetic enhancements. By contrast, proprietary patent protection for genetic enhancements would tend to spur genetic innovation, but would tend to limit access to those genetic enhancements through discriminatory mechanisms such as price and favoritism. Open source genetics likely would offer different societal outcomes for genetic enhancement than would proprietary patent systems. Furthermore, the societal implications of an open source genetics approach to genetic enhancement likely would not have the simple, salutary effects many in the open biology movement tend to assume. Rather, open source genetics might lead to more widespread genetic enhancement than would proprietary patent approaches, though the potential pool of available genetic enhancements likely would be smaller. A proprietary patent approach would likely ensure high rates of genetic enhancement innovation, research, and development, and efficiently mediate access to genetic enhancements, but likely would allow access to genetic enhancements to fewer members of society. With both open source genetics and proprietary patent approaches, there remains the prospect that genetic enhancement might lead to human evolutionary change. Public policy and the law must grapple with the implications of genetic enhancement before current technological possibilities become societal realities. Open source genetics offers a significant alternative to the prospect of the patent system as a substantial arbiter of parental decisions regarding genetic enhancement of their offspring. Open source genetics holds the potential to democratize accessibility of genetic enhancements, while discouraging high rates of genetic enhancement innovation. However, the implications that open source genetics has for the future of human society - and even human evolution - are not clearly more beneficial than the implications the patent system would have. It is certain that the implications that open source genetics and proprietary patent systems have for future human genetic enhancement should be subjected to thorough analysis and debate prior to the imminent arrival of human genetic enhancement technologies.
    Description
    Full-text available at SSRN. See link in this record.
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/1808/11579
    Collections
    • Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies Scholarly Works [736]
    • Law School Scholarly Works [621]
    Citation
    Andrew W. Torrance, Open and Proprietary Biological Innovation in Human Genetic Enhancement, 30 WASH. U. J. L. & POL’Y 93 (2009).

    Items in KU ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.


    We want to hear from you! Please share your stories about how Open Access to this item benefits YOU.


    Contact KU ScholarWorks
    785-864-8983
    KU Libraries
    1425 Jayhawk Blvd
    Lawrence, KS 66045
    785-864-8983

    KU Libraries
    1425 Jayhawk Blvd
    Lawrence, KS 66045
    Image Credits
     

     

    Browse

    All of KU ScholarWorksCommunities & CollectionsThis Collection

    My Account

    Login

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    Contact KU ScholarWorks
    785-864-8983
    KU Libraries
    1425 Jayhawk Blvd
    Lawrence, KS 66045
    785-864-8983

    KU Libraries
    1425 Jayhawk Blvd
    Lawrence, KS 66045
    Image Credits
     

     

    The University of Kansas
      Contact KU ScholarWorks
    Lawrence, KS | Maps
     
    • Academics
    • Admission
    • Alumni
    • Athletics
    • Campuses
    • Giving
    • Jobs

    The University of Kansas prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, ethnicity, religion, sex, national origin, age, ancestry, disability, status as a veteran, sexual orientation, marital status, parental status, gender identity, gender expression and genetic information in the University’s programs and activities. The following person has been designated to handle inquiries regarding the non-discrimination policies: Director of the Office of Institutional Opportunity and Access, IOA@ku.edu, 1246 W. Campus Road, Room 153A, Lawrence, KS, 66045, (785)864-6414, 711 TTY.

     Contact KU
    Lawrence, KS | Maps