tommaso lizzul / Shutterstock.com
The IP landscape in Europe for the CRISPR gene-editing technology is very murky, making it difficult for potential licensees, says Catherine Coombes of HGF.
The continuing interference proceedings in the US concerning clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/Cas9 systems for gene-editing of eukaryotes have received much media attention. Coverage focuses on two groups: one led by Feng Zhang of the Broad Institute of Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the other by Jennifer Doudna of the University of California, Berkeley and Emmanuelle Charpentier of the Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research. The commentary focuses on a potential winner-takes-all scenario.
However, the situation in Europe, where both groups’ patent applications will be examined under a first-to-file system, has received much less media attention. The question remains, which of these two groups will have the underlying rights to CRISPR/Cas9 in Europe? Or will filings by other applicants during this period lead to a more complex early CRISPR/cas9 landscape in Europe?
You need a subscription to continue reading this content.
To access the full archive, digital magazines and special reports you will need to take out a paid subscription.
News stories up to a week old and feature articles on the day of publication are accessible with a BASIC FREE ACCOUNT.
If you have already subscribed please login.
If you have any technical issues please email tech support.
For access to the complete website, archive, and to receive print publications, choose '12 MONTH SUBSCRIPTION'. For a free, two-week trial with full access, select ‘TWO WEEK FREE TRIAL’; and for basic access to the latest news on the website and weekly email news alerts choose the 'BASIC FREE ACCOUNT' registration.
Catherine Coombes, HGF, CRISPR, DNA, IP, Broad, licensing, PCT, TPOs,