The proposed limitations stem from fears of intellectual property theft.

In efforts to translate basic-science results into pharmaceuticals and other technologies, success cannot be taken for granted.

The battle for the control of the intellectual property surrounding CRISPR-Cas9 is as storied and nuanced as the technology itself.

The University of California files a brief in its appeal challenging the ruling that the Broad Institute’s group would retain its CRISPR genome-editing patent.

The European Patent Office will grant patent rights over the use of CRISPR in all cell types to a University of California team, contrasting with a recent decision in the U.S.

The USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board has ruled in favor of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard retaining intellectual property rights covered by its patents for CRISPR gene-editing technology.

Intellectual property theft, gun violence, scientific failure, and more

Novel uses for existing and failed drugs may save companies time and money in bringing new therapeutics to market.

This year, the developers of CRISPR gene-editing technology argued over patent rights, a researcher fought to unmask anonymous PubPeer commenters, US regulators considered “three-parent” babies, and troubles continued for Theranos.