Hide Your Wife, Hide Your Kids (From Patents!)

Almost exactly one month ago, I wrote an article addressing a victory for Myriad Genetics, Inc., where the firm won the rights to patent a specific genetic sequence related to breast cancer.  I was quite blunt and even had a wonderfully sarcastic .GIF file to back it up.  (In addition to many valid reasons why such a victory shouldn't stand.)  Patents are a problematic matter, especially in the realm of science.  If someone were to scream "Patent!", I would scream back "Apple!" or "Motorola!"  Never would I yell "Abstract mathematical concepts and ideas!"

Such is the problem NewScientist.com addresses in its article, "Should business be allowed to patent mathematics?"  In the piece, there are, as you might expect, two stances.  The first, represented by Dave Edwards of the University of Georgia in Athens, states that "There is no economic basis for the distinction between discovery and invention."  He would continue to say that algorithms and other mathematical formulas, especially pertaining to software, should be patentable, as poorer independent companies could sustain their businesses with their numerical expertise.

On the other hand, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a nonprofit organization based in San Francisco, says that the current system hinders innovation, namely because of the long, arduous, and expensive patent process, and trolls.  By trolls, EFF does mean what you might be thinking: Companies that buy cheap, near-ancient patents just to file a lawsuit and hope to gain money through that means.  In fact, according to the Boston University School of Law, "trolling" cost companies in the United States over $29 billion.  Clearly, there's a problem here.

Normally, I would continue in my offbeat, sarcastic manner, although I like to refer to it as "witty," addressing  various points of this debate.  However, this debate, while an excellent case study, pales in comparison to a serious problem that affects the growth and development of science and technology.  Whether it is a commercial technology, Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics, Co. (2011 - Forever), our own genes, or fundamental components of technological advancement, the involvement of private corporations is a hindrance that would have Robert K. Merton rolling in his grave.

Obviously, there is an opportunity for a rant, but screaming at something doesn't usher change.  Merton's scientific norm, "Communism" (not you, Marx), states that findings in science, including ideas and equations, should be open to all.  A true precursor to what we know as open-source software, Merton's wishes can never be fulfilled if the continual desire for wealth overcomes the essence of science.  When genes that hold the key to people's lives, and abstract ideas that no one can truly lay claim to are falling victim to the dollar, progress falling to the wayside...