Ownership and sharing in synthetic biology: A ‘diverse ecology’ of the open and the proprietary?

Synthetic biology is in the process of inventing itself and its ownership regimes. There are currently two dominant approaches to ownership and sharing in the field. The work of the J. Craig Venter Institute is grounded in molecular biology and in gene patenting. Parts-based approaches to synthetic biology, in contrast, are inspired by engineering, open source software and distributed innovation, and they are building new communities to help further this agenda. Despite these differences, the two approaches make very similar use of informational and computational metaphors. They both also have a place in a vision for the future of synthetic biology as a ‘diverse ecology’ of the open and the proprietary. It remains to be seen whether such a diverse ecology will be sustainable, whether synthetic biology will go down the patenting route taken by previous biotechnologies or whether different forms of ownership and sharing will emerge. Which path is taken will depend on the success of synthetic biology in achieving both its technical objectives and its social innovations.

[1]  Henrik Loodin,et al.  The politics of life itself Biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century , 2009 .

[2]  D. Endy,et al.  Refactoring bacteriophage T7 , 2005, Molecular systems biology.

[3]  J. Malcolm The not returning part of it: "Wish I could be there: notes from a phobic life". , 2007, The New York review of books.

[4]  Andrew W. Torrance,et al.  Synthesizing Law for Synthetic Biology , 2010 .

[5]  M. Adcock,et al.  Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) and Genetics - a study into the impact and management of intellectual property rights within the healthcare sector , 2003 .

[6]  Barry Barnes,et al.  Genomes and What to Make of Them , 2008 .

[7]  Thomas H Segall-Shapiro,et al.  Creation of a Bacterial Cell Controlled by a Chemically Synthesized Genome , 2010, Science.

[8]  R. Eisenberg,et al.  Re-examining the role of patents in appropriating the value of DNA sequences. , 2000, Emory law journal.

[9]  R. Fleischmann,et al.  Whole-genome random sequencing and assembly of Haemophilus influenzae Rd. , 1995, Science.

[10]  T Takahashi,et al.  [Cultural anthropology. 2]. , 1968, [Kango kyoiku] Japanese journal of nurses' education.

[11]  R. Kwok Five hard truths for synthetic biology , 2010, Nature.

[12]  Donna Haraway,et al.  A Game of Cat's Cradle: Science Studies, Feminist Theory, Cultural Studies , 1994 .

[13]  Andrea Bonaccorsi,et al.  Why Open Source Software Can Succeed , 2003 .

[14]  Aldons J. Lusis,et al.  What Genes Can't Do , 2003, Nature Medicine.

[15]  Yochai Benkler,et al.  Coase's Penguin, or Linux and the Nature of the Firm , 2001, ArXiv.

[16]  A. Bonaccorsi,et al.  From protecting texts to protecting objects in biotechnology and software: a tale of changes of ontological assumptions in intellectual property protection , 2011 .

[17]  M. Rahaman Biotechnology, neoliberal politics of life and the spirit of biocapital , 2011 .

[18]  R. Fleischmann,et al.  Complete Genome Sequence of the Methanogenic Archaeon, Methanococcus jannaschii , 1996, Science.

[19]  Drew Endy,et al.  Adventures in Synthetic Biology , 2005 .

[20]  Heidi Ledford,et al.  Garage biotech: Life hackers , 2010, Nature.

[21]  Michael A. Specter,et al.  A life of its own: where will synthetic biology lead us? , 2009, New Yorker.

[22]  Arie Rip,et al.  Re-inventing Innovation , 2010 .

[23]  Pasquale Stano,et al.  Approaches to semi-synthetic minimal cells: a review , 2005, Naturwissenschaften.

[24]  Christopher Kelty,et al.  Geeks, Social Imaginaries, and Recursive Publics , 2005 .

[25]  S. Sarkar The Philosophy and History of Molecular Biology: New Perspectives , 2001 .

[26]  Lawrence Lessig The Internet under Siege , 2001 .

[27]  Robert Root-Bernstein,et al.  Biology Is Technology: The Promise, Peril, and New Business of Engineering Life , 2010 .

[28]  H. Sauro Modularity defined , 2008, Molecular systems biology.

[29]  M. Reiss The ethics of patenting DNA , 1969 .

[30]  Stefan Helmreich,et al.  Species of Biocapital , 2008 .

[31]  J. Calvert Collaboration as a Research Method? Navigating Social Scientific Involvement in Synthetic Biology , 2013 .

[32]  J. Conley,et al.  Back to the Future: Rethinking the Product of Nature Doctrine as Barrier to Biotechnology Patents , 2002 .

[33]  Jane Calvert,et al.  The Commodification of Emergence: Systems Biology, Synthetic Biology and Intellectual Property , 2008 .

[34]  Kaushik Sunder Rajan,et al.  Biocapital: The Constitution of Postgenomic Life , 2006 .

[35]  Karen M Polizzi What is synthetic biology? , 2013, Methods in molecular biology.

[36]  D. G. Gibson,et al.  Enzymatic assembly of DNA molecules up to several hundred kilobases , 2009, Nature Methods.

[37]  Hans-Jörg Rheinberger,et al.  The Concept of the Gene in Development and Evolution , 2008 .

[38]  J. Calvert,et al.  Invisible genomes: the genomics revolution and patenting practice. , 2008, Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical sciences.

[39]  Gregory Radick,et al.  The Century of the Gene , 2001, Heredity.

[40]  Christina D Smolke,et al.  Building outside of the box: iGEM and the BioBricks Foundation , 2009, Nature Biotechnology.

[41]  J. Boyle,et al.  Synthetic Biology: Caught between Property Rights, the Public Domain, and the Commons , 2007, PLoS biology.

[42]  Albert E. Steenge,et al.  Governance of innovation , 2010 .

[43]  Roger Brent,et al.  A partnership between biology and engineering , 2004, Nature Biotechnology.

[44]  K. Novak The complete genome sequence… , 1998, Nature Medicine.

[45]  Joachim Henkel,et al.  Parts, property and sharing , 2009, Nature Biotechnology.

[46]  Robert Cook-Deegan,et al.  The Genome Negotiations. (Book Reviews: The Gene Wars. Science, Politics, and the Human Genome.) , 1994 .

[47]  A. Holden,et al.  The SNP consortium: summary of a private consortium effort to develop an applied map of the human genome. , 2002, BioTechniques.

[48]  A. Rai Intellectual Property Rights in Biotechnology: Addressing New Technology , 2000 .

[49]  Nikolas Rose,et al.  Molecular Biopolitics, Somatic Ethics and the Spirit of Biocapital , 2007 .

[50]  Maureen A. O’Malley,et al.  Knowledge-making distinctions in synthetic biology. , 2008, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[51]  Maureen A. O’Malley,et al.  Whole-genome patenting , 2005, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[52]  Alain Pottage,et al.  Organisms and manufactures: on the history of plant inventions , 2007 .

[53]  J. Chin,et al.  Modular approaches to expanding the functions of living matter , 2006, Nature chemical biology.

[54]  Sahotra Sarkar,et al.  Biological Information: A Skeptical Look at Some Central Dogmas of Molecular Biology , 1996 .

[55]  John Cullen,et al.  Democratizing Innovation , 2020, Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

[56]  L. Demaine,et al.  Reinventing the Double Helix: A Novel and Nonobvious Reconceptualization of the Biotechnology Patent , 2002, Stanford law review.

[57]  C. Waldby Code Unknown , 2001, Social studies of science.

[58]  Mark A. Bedau,et al.  The ethics of protocells : moral and social implications of creating life in the laboratory , 2009 .

[59]  R. Fleischmann,et al.  The Minimal Gene Complement of Mycoplasma genitalium , 1995, Science.

[60]  J. Hopfield,et al.  From molecular to modular cell biology , 1999, Nature.

[61]  Ralph E. Hoffman,et al.  The Gene Wars: Science, Politics, and the Human Genome , 1996 .

[62]  A. Arkin,et al.  Fast, cheap and somewhat in control , 2006, Genome Biology.

[63]  P. Joly,et al.  How did the gene become a chemical compound? The ontology of the gene and the patenting of DNA , 2011 .

[64]  Yehudit Judy Dori,et al.  Experiential Engineering Through iGEM—An Undergraduate Summer Competition in Synthetic Biology , 2011 .

[65]  Hans-Jörg Rheinberger,et al.  Gene concepts : fragments from the perspective of molecular biology , 2000 .

[66]  Marilyn Strathern,et al.  A community of critics? Thoughts on new knowledge* , 2006 .

[67]  Christopher Kelty,et al.  Outlaw, hackers, victorian amateurs: diagnosing public participation in the life sciences today , 2010 .

[68]  Joyce Tait,et al.  Synthetic Biology the technoscience and its societal consequences , 2009 .

[69]  Lily E. Kay,et al.  Who Wrote the Book of Life?: A History of the Genetic Code , 2000 .

[70]  John Dupr Understanding Contemporary Genomics , 2004, Perspectives on Science.

[71]  Kenneth A. Oye,et al.  The Intellectual Commons and Property in Synthetic Biology , 2009 .

[72]  M. Lynch The evolution of genetic networks by non-adaptive processes , 2007, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[73]  Jonathon E. Mote,et al.  The laws of the markets , 2000 .