copyrighting DNA tunes

Posted by Jon Ippolito | Tue May 21st 2002 1 a.m.

From the Now I've Seen Everything Dept:

"Maxygen's scientists and lawyers are proposing [to] encode the DNA sequences as MP3s or other music files and then copyright these genetic 'tunes'....As the 'authors' of these DNA-based songs, Maxygen could, in theory, control the rights to the compositions for 95 years or more--as opposed to the 17 years given under current patent law."

http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,52666,00.html

As laughable as Maxygen's proposal is, it also hints that the structural defects of copyright--which is supposed to protect the lowly from the mighty--are independent of the particular situation of art and artists.

What's next, a Celera Genomics press conference with guest spokesman Lars Urlich?

I pity you science fiction writers out there, trying to think up futures as bizarre as our present.

jon
  • Max Herman | Tue May 21st 2002 1 a.m.
    In a message dated 5/21/2002 8:49:59 AM Central Daylight Time,
    JIppolito@guggenheim.org writes:

    > I pity you science fiction writers out there, trying to think up futures as
    > bizarre as our present.
    >
    > jon

    Yeah me too Jon. If I may ask, what was your reaction when I threw tickets
    at that panel? I remember the speaker ignored it, said "to be glad we live
    in a country" and gave me a dirty look, then I got the hell outta dodge.

    My only actual dispute with your stated opinions is that once you said at
    AEN/Walker that "people love Michael Jordan, he's a winner," or something to
    that effect. And the topic was competition among artists! Remember this is
    pre-911 when Brad Brace was so upset about creaky curation. So individual
    competition for stardom I think is not good vis-a-vis netart revenue, guild
    being a better way to go, but aren't guilds socialist?

    We've come a long way, baby,

    Max Herman
    http://www.geocities.com/genius-2000/Focusgroup.GIF

    PS--What is your take on the Eyestorm demise? Professionally?

    ++
Your Reply