11-06-2012, 11:04 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-09-2012, 10:51 PM by Administrator.)
Recent talk at the Open Science Summit in silicon valley. Should biotechnology be made open source? Pros and cons and is it a sustainable model?
From OpenBiotech Website / FAQ: http://www.openbiotech.com/category_s/1821.htm
Aren’t you going to completely destroy closed-source companies’ business model?
We do think that the proprietary reagent industry managed to come into existence largely because so far, there were no open source players. After all, why would anyone buy products that they can’t make more of, with severe use restrictions, and pay extra for the privilege? When similar products are available in equally good or superior quality, in a form that can be copied, with no restrictions, and cost much less, then the proprietary business model will simply stop making sense.
It is not our intention to harm anyone’s business. We hope that these companies will adapt, ultimately acquire our open source DNA sequences and begin competing on manufacturing the same products. This will result in a business landscape where the key competitive trait stops being how well you keep your secrets, and starts being how efficiently you can make quality products. In the end, the main beneficiaries will be the world’s scientists and therapy developers, and with them, all of humankind.
Isn’t open source unprofitable?
Open source principles did indeed build a reputation of being unprofitable, largely due to the experience in software development. Any given piece of software can be copied indefinitely many times, for free, with zero skill required. Why would I pay for a piece of software, when its creator encourages me to legally copy it? Thus, it is at least a legitimate question how to make money in open source software.
In biotechnology, it is different. With access to the necessary DNA, biological sequences and objects can be copied, and doing so is much cheaper than, say developing a new sequence. However, it still does require some work, and significant technical expertise, to scale production, purify, characterize and fully validate the resulting biological products.
We find the situation more than sufficient to build a sustainable, innovative organization.
Why are you doing it?
We started primarily because we want open source biotechnology tools to use ourselves. We are a team of young scientists with a background in regenerative medicine. In trying to start our first regenerative medicine company, we perceived the use restrictions and, for lack of a better word, obscene profit margins seen in contemporary research tools products as extremely frustrating. So we set out to make our own research tools. In doing so, we were able to free ourselves from many types of use restrictions, remove most of the cost of doing our own research, and continue our work in regenerative medicine. But we also realized that we cannot make regenerative medicine happen all by ourselves. We decided to make our tools fully open source, and offer them to the world, so that other groups can join in the same benefits.
From OpenBiotech Website / FAQ: http://www.openbiotech.com/category_s/1821.htm
Aren’t you going to completely destroy closed-source companies’ business model?
We do think that the proprietary reagent industry managed to come into existence largely because so far, there were no open source players. After all, why would anyone buy products that they can’t make more of, with severe use restrictions, and pay extra for the privilege? When similar products are available in equally good or superior quality, in a form that can be copied, with no restrictions, and cost much less, then the proprietary business model will simply stop making sense.
It is not our intention to harm anyone’s business. We hope that these companies will adapt, ultimately acquire our open source DNA sequences and begin competing on manufacturing the same products. This will result in a business landscape where the key competitive trait stops being how well you keep your secrets, and starts being how efficiently you can make quality products. In the end, the main beneficiaries will be the world’s scientists and therapy developers, and with them, all of humankind.
Isn’t open source unprofitable?
Open source principles did indeed build a reputation of being unprofitable, largely due to the experience in software development. Any given piece of software can be copied indefinitely many times, for free, with zero skill required. Why would I pay for a piece of software, when its creator encourages me to legally copy it? Thus, it is at least a legitimate question how to make money in open source software.
In biotechnology, it is different. With access to the necessary DNA, biological sequences and objects can be copied, and doing so is much cheaper than, say developing a new sequence. However, it still does require some work, and significant technical expertise, to scale production, purify, characterize and fully validate the resulting biological products.
We find the situation more than sufficient to build a sustainable, innovative organization.
Why are you doing it?
We started primarily because we want open source biotechnology tools to use ourselves. We are a team of young scientists with a background in regenerative medicine. In trying to start our first regenerative medicine company, we perceived the use restrictions and, for lack of a better word, obscene profit margins seen in contemporary research tools products as extremely frustrating. So we set out to make our own research tools. In doing so, we were able to free ourselves from many types of use restrictions, remove most of the cost of doing our own research, and continue our work in regenerative medicine. But we also realized that we cannot make regenerative medicine happen all by ourselves. We decided to make our tools fully open source, and offer them to the world, so that other groups can join in the same benefits.
![[+]](https://www.biotechnologyforums.com/images/netpen-pro/collapse_collapsed.png)