>"But in the midst of this debate, perhaps a more fundamental one is taking place - whether some of CRISPR’s future products, like customized DNA, qualify as co

>"But in the midst of this debate, perhaps a more fundamental one is taking place - whether some of CRISPR’s future products, like customized DNA, qualify as copyrightable entities." That's the full sentence in context, and no, the CRISPER-cas9 patent dispute isn't over copyrighting the products of the technique. This author is trying to generate outrage over copyrighting DNA which this issue isn't about. The issue is over first-to-file. Again, this article is pretty far off target.