The great GM crop scandal.

[JamesM]

Everyone needs a plan B.

[Cricket Tragic]

Sounds like crying 'wolf' to me.

[JamesM]

Not at all CT it's just the standard academic fair results envy, plaigiarism and malicious incompetence etc... as other people created that situation I'm treating it like any other investment.

[JamesM]

BBSRC Oasis database : 97A4D03736

Engineering crops for resistance to corn rootworm using inhibitors of insect digestive enzymes

http://oasis.bbsrc.ac.uk/netans-bin/...ate=daejep.1.6


Cordis European database : EU FAIR

Lower application of insecticides by the production of insect resistant crops using novel protease inhibitor genes

http://cordis.europa.eu/search/index.cfm

Tut, tut conflict of interest, involving multiple companies and research institutions not very unwise to setup a conflict of interest scenario in a highly controversial industry.

[JamesM]

You know I'm warming to this thread something about the truth but as I always think when you start something always finish it, gotta go look out some old files anyone interested in seeing what an International Patent Application looks like?

[JamesM]

I'm fairly sure that was what all the fuss was about some stupid little biotech company and the IP protection they wasted because they didn't have the talent to bring it to fruition.

Lets keep things civil please daddy.

[JamesM]

Civil I am always civil, but the truth will out.

I was rather suprised when it took twice the usual period to clear the thesis, collusion by the academic institution possibly?

[JamesM]

Well the patent application specifications were PPD50593 and PPD50602, U.K. patent applications 0026351.7 and 0026350.9 respectively. They covered a range of rootworm sequences and some potato inhibitor sequences, very oddly the potato sequences were not mentioned on the front cover of the relevant application. Was this an attempt to hide the potato sequences? It was successful I didn't spot them until much later but as I hadn't received any IP training then can't expect me to read them.

They were very easy to get as all I did was prepare a two page report including the sequences and say that they could be patented. That was my entire contribution, next thing I know the bio-tech project manager requested a presentation be abandoned due to intellectual protection being engaged.

But what I couldn't understand was why as the company partners had been informed by myself, of a directly competing also industrially funded research project, that the requested IP training wasn't provided. Withholding IP training makes no sense when the project manager was informed of data transfer requests by senior staff at the University, and when they sent the full patent specifications they even provided no IP training when the thesis was being written.

What possible business logic leads to witholding IP training from someone who has copies of a companies international patent applications?

You know with two concurrent and competing industrially funded GM research projects, groundbreaking research, intellectual patent applications, company failures, acting in a manner directly responsible for increasing the difficulty of the work and plaigiarism in the scientific literature someone might think that there are a lot of questions that could be asked.

Very uncomftable questions.

[JamesM]

Suppose I should scan and post the patent application front covers to prove it, that way it'd show I'm whiter than white. Hey guys you think that they might want to sue me for telling the truth about this?

I suppose 'selling the every generations inheritance of a natural world for funding and patent money', might be a harsh accusation, even though it is accurate.