Comments on: Copyright law meets synthetic life meets James Joyce

By: Happy Bloomsday - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

Happy Bloomsday - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 21:08:14 +0000

[...] That may actually be the point. My 2004 article on the Bloomsday phenomenon covered the contingent nature of literary reputation. Even academic darlings like Ulysses live or die based on popular support. The June 16 celebrants are not so much interested in literary merit as in midsummer fun and a pop version of Irishness that's more urbanized than the versions presented by such icons of the Old Sod as Warwick Davis and Lucky the Lucky Charms leprechaun. (It's a special testament to Ulysses' durability that it still attracts fans despite the rotten stewardship of the Joyce estate, which throws the wet blanket of copyright on would-be adapters ranging from the singer Kate Bush to the biologist Craig Venter.) [...]

By: Zwei bizarre Copyright-Fälle « KULTURTECHNO

Zwei bizarre Copyright-Fälle « KULTURTECHNO — Wed, 18 May 2011 03:00:49 +0000

[...] #1: Craig Venter hat 2010 eine (verschlüsselte) Zeile aus James Joyce’ „A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man“ in die DNA einer künstlichen Mikrobe eingebaut und produziert durch jede Vermehrung neue Kopien dieses Textes, außerdem ergeben sich durch Mutationen Remixe. Klasse Idee – generative Algorithmen sind ja seit zwei Jahrzehnten gang&gäbe in der Computermusik, aber das mal wirklich von der Natur machen lassen hat schon was – ob da wieder literarische Qualitäten rumkommen ist fraglich, also ab mit der Idee in die Konzeptkunst-Ecke! Nun kommt’s wie’s kommen muss, Venter hat von den Rechte-Inhabern den Rüffel erhalten und soll sowas wie eine Unterlassungserklärung abgeben (wobei Joyce doch gerade allgemeinfrei wird, ach, wasweißich). Mehr dazu hier. [...]

By: poetry and genetics, again « biology in culture

poetry and genetics, again « biology in culture — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 09:31:29 +0000

[...] You can read two interesting articles on the subject by Carl Zimmer at The Loom here and here. (In the latter, Zimmer discusses the letter of disappointment verging on threat of copyright [...]

By: lasis_blog

lasis_blog — Sat, 02 Apr 2011 16:50:51 +0000

New York Law School’s legal reporting blog, LASIS, takes a look at what would happen if this case made it to the court room: http://www.lasisblog.com/2011/04/02/copyright-clash-at-the-cellular-level/

By: Трансліт » Blog Archive » Генетика проти копірайту

Трансліт » Blog Archive » Генетика проти копірайту — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 09:53:03 +0000

[...] Estate), які заявили, що, скориставшись цитатою з Джойса, науковці порушили авторське право. Враховуючи той факт, що створена Венретом бактерія в [...]

By: Martin Duys

Martin Duys — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 15:04:43 +0000

Venter holds patents on things that occur in nature i.e. specific gene sequences. Am I correct in saying that? I assume he would intend to make money out of replicating those sequences at some point. He is then threatened with a suit for copying something created by another human being from which he intends to make no money. The irony.

By: Athena Andreadis

Athena Andreadis — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 14:59:35 +0000

This is also ironic in view of the fact that when Venter started working on the EST (expressed sequence tag) database he intended to demand copyright for the ESTs, the genes that coded them, and the proteins they produced.

By: Biologist

Biologist — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 09:40:02 +0000

@20 – The code is written in TAGC (the four nucleic acids that make up DNA), then this code is transcribed into AUCG (the complementary nucleic acids of RNA), and then each sequence of three letters is translated into an amino acid. There are 21 amino acids, each designated by a different letter. Amino acids are strung together by the ribosomes and fold up into a protein. Proteins are the functional units of the cell – motors, gates, and energy-producing equipment. This DNA–>RNA–>protein code was not arbitrarily decided by Venter. It is woven into the fabric of life. Writing in this code, the authors included instructions to decode further. So they can’t (and certainly don’t want to) pretend the bacteria says absolutely nothing or anything.

I like this article. Makes me think of the billion monkeys typing for a billion years to come up with Hamlet. Will these bacteria spin Joyce into Swift? Or maybe into an antifungal?

By: The morning coffee explores the circle of life | Mr. Topp and the Big Bad Blog

Tue, 22 Mar 2011 06:08:17 +0000

[...] estate of James Joyce thought this to be a breach of copyright and sent a cease and desist letter. The Loom wonders, if it were to go to court and Venter were to lose (which it won’t, and he wouldn’t), [...]

By: James Joyce and the first synthetic life form « JJQ

James Joyce and the first synthetic life form « JJQ — Mon, 21 Mar 2011 17:27:15 +0000

[...] have commented on the legal implications of Dr. Venter’s project and the Estate, including one who imagines what would happen if this copyright infringment went to court and ruled in favor of [...]