Researchers and companies exploring CRISPR/Cas9 know the IP environment is anything but straightforward. This new article sheds light on how complex and dynamic this patent space really is, even for newer Cas9 variants.
Key takeaways:
- Overlapping claims and major legal disputes: The foundational patents uncovered in 2012 by Berkeley (Doudna/Charpentier) and those by the Broad Institute (Zhang et al.) (granted in the US for eukaryotic cell use) sparked years of back-and-forth in interference proceedings (and is still ongoing!).
- Different rulings across jurisdictions: While the U.S. USPTO favored Broad in 2022, appeals are ongoing. Meanwhile, patent offices in Europe, Canada, China, and Japan have issued mixed decisions adding to the global confusion.
- Patent thicket risk: Analysts describe the IP landscape as a “patent thicket” or “clear as mud,” where overlapping, broad patents create a chokehold on freedom to operate, especially affecting smaller players.
- Offshoots and alternatives gaining traction: To bypass CRISPR/Cas9’s tangled IP, many innovators are pivoting to other systems like Cas12 and Cas13. But these too may overlap with existing IP.
Why this article matters: It offers a detailed, up-to-date visualisation of patent claims, helping bring clarity to a murky terrain. Even if patents aren’t your daily concern, at least understanding who owns what and where, can shape smarter R&D and partnership strategies.