Landergate: a link list

Lander’s article has spawned further commentary, as well as raising afresh the general issue of the CRISPR patents. I’ll try to keep a running list. I’ll include links from yesterday’s post for completeness. If I miss any posts or articles, post it in a comment and I’ll add it.

  • Here’s an article from Nature, Jan. 12, on the heating up of the CRISPR patent battle.
  • …and one from The Scientist.
  • …and one from Antonio Regalado over at MIT Tech News.
  • Interesting how Lander’s history in Cell coincided with a clutch of articles in other journals, hm?
  • Storify of (some of) Michael Eisen’s tweets about Lander’s article.
  • Included in yesterday’s post, there has been vigorous discussion at PubPeer.
  • As noted at the end of yesterday’s post, here’s Dominic Berry on the intellectual-property issues involved.
  • Derek Lowe, over at Science Translational Medicine, asks “Why this CRISPR article now?
  • KQED in the Bay Area has a useful article on some of the legal brambles in the CRISPR story.
  • In “‘Heroes of CRISPR’ disputed,” The Scientist notes that not only Jennifer Doudna but even George Church have cited factual errors in Lander’s account. While Doudna says she wasn’t consulted, Church says he was, that he responded, and that none of the errors he pointed out were corrected.
  • A longread from Yarden Katz asks, “Who owns molecular biology?” Nice setting of the patent dispute in historical context, going back to Bayh-Dole.
  • And by the by, here’s the Broad’s official statement on the patent interference process.
  • Michael Eisen is collecting “evidence that Eric Lander serially rewrites scientific history”  under the delightful hashtag #LandersWhigHistory.
  • Nice post mortem over at MIT Technology Review.
  • 1/19: Emmanuelle Charpentier added her own brief rebuttal on PubMed Commons.
  • 1/20: Jennifer Oullette, over at Jezebel, accuses Lander of “writing women out” of the history of CRISPR. I agree that’s the effect, but there’s no reason to believe it was his motivation. Doudna and Charpentier are his major competitors. He’d have done the same if his rivals were named John and Emanuel.

3 thoughts on “Landergate: a link list

  1. Pingback: Why This CRISPR Article, and Why Now? | In the Pipeline

  2. Pingback: Discovering CRISPR

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *