'Steal This Video' - Insanity of Intellectual Property. Can Your DNA Be 'OWNED'?

@jacobtothe: I highly recommend Stephan Kinsella's short treatise Against Intellectual Property for a thorough dismantling of the entire concept. As a patent attorney, he is uniquely qualified to cover the matter. It's only about 60 pages long.

@valued-customer: There's ongoing issues with this genetic IP. The SCOTUS has denied patents for natural genes, but they have allowed novel genetic sequences to be patented. Now we have CRISPR, an immune system component many bacteria have devised to excise viral DNA that has been transfected into their genomes. There are ways this can be used to excise and transfect genetic sequences into genomes, including human genomes, and also including cDNA and lab created sequences. In fact the modmRNA medical interventions have been widely reported to transfect a variety of DNA into the genomes of the 'vaccinated' with modmRNA medical devices. I don't believe <a href=" source, but I have speculated that SCOTUS could so rule (there is some point at which humans are so modified genetically that they aren't human anymore). SCOTUS could also extend the Monsanto precedent that has established that farmers growing crops containing it's patented genes owed Monsanto royalties even when Monsanto pollinated those crops with it's patented genes. SCOTUS could extend the exception to slavery in the 13th Amendment so that patent holders could seize the GMO victims of their modmRNA products that transfected patented DNA into their genomes without their knowledge, who did not pay royalties demanded, as their property. Bill Gates, Moderna, Pfizer, and the USG, all have patents on a lot of genes involved in the modmRNA injections. The USG, already the largest slave owner in the world today (because of that exception in the 13th Amendment that allows governments to hold as slaves people convicted of crimes), is unlikely to defend people from being enslaved by itself, which puts it on the side of the patent holders in this business. I reckon patents on DNA and similar building blocks of living beings, like mRNA, that can be transfected into living creatures, whether made in the lab or not, need to be unable to be patented, because we plainly observe that this is happening to people today, and will happen to people more in the future. I don't know how to handle the GMO question. Clearly people are a spectrum and there is no humanity test to determine whether some living creature is a human or not. There will obviously have to be. I don't know where to draw the line, and don't think anyone else does either. However, CRISPR is table top tech (genetically engineering living organisms is actually very easy to do with simple and inexpensive tools on your kitchen table. What is hard and expensive is knowing what genetic engineering to do), and people are already altering their own genes using it, as well as being altered by criminal conspiracies of cruel corporations. Thanks!

@rove: I love this authors: [Literature] Charles Dickens: A Child's Dream of a Star 3/5