3 ms·

It seems that in determining who first 'invented' CRISPR, the PTO has gone into lab notebooks as far back as 2012. https://twitter.com/jsherkow/status/14984137

• mjfl 5y ago
  that's not too far back, relative to the discovery of Cas9 gene editing...
• ranger207 5y ago
  When I did some undergrad research, the professor was very careful to specify that lab notebooks were essentially legal records of what you worked on and when. It's interesting to see that actually in use
  • jamestimmins 5y ago
    I've read similar things about lab notebooks at Bell Labs, which certainly makes sense given the value of the IP they were creating there (among other things, the first transistor was invented there).
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  • Fomite 5y ago
    This is hugely important. It comes up rarely, but when it does, it's essential. Like millions of dollars, people's careers essential. For things like this, or scientific misconduct cases.
  • dekhn 5y ago
    Some ~20 years ago, my professor suggested we not only sign and date the notebook, but hash the contents and publish the hash to the new york times. I'm told this in some way resembles the blockchain.
    • Traster 5y ago
      Just stick a cronjob in to mint an NFT of it nightly.
  • cma 5y ago
    It is less relevant now for patents after the move from first to invent to first to publish/file (happened after crispr).
• s1artibartfast 5y ago
  Why wasn't this simply based on first to file? I thought the PTO moved away from the conception standard to a disclosure one? Board was also first to file.
  • jordanpg 5y ago
    The first-to-file provisions apply to applications filed on or after March 16, 2013. These were filed well before that date. Under the old first-to-invent paradigm, when there is a question of fact concerning who invented first, the USPTO adjudicates with an "interference" proceeding, which is what this is.
    • s1artibartfast 5y ago
      Thanks, I knew it had been a while, but I guess not as long as I thought!