- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Patenting Foundational Technologies: Lessons From CRISPR and Other Core Biotechnologies”
Sigrid Sterckx, Kristof Van Assche, Lisa Diependaele, Michael Morrison, Julian Cockbain & Oliver Feeney
American Journal of Bioethics 19 (1):W10-W13 (2019)
Abstract
This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)Author Profiles
My notes
Similar books and articles
Patenting Foundational Technologies: Lessons From CRISPR and Other Core Biotechnologies.Oliver Feeney, Julian Cockbain, Michael Morrison, Lisa Diependaele, Kristof Van Assche & Sigrid Sterckx - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (12):36-48.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Human Germline CRISPR-Cas Modification: Toward a Regulatory Framework”.Niklaus H. Evitt, Shamik Mascharak & Russ B. Altman - 2016 - American Journal of Bioethics 16 (10):1-2.
CRISPR as a Driving Force: The Model T of Biotechnology.Carlos Mariscal & Angel Petropanagos - 2016 - Monash Bioethics Review 34 (2):1-16.
Response to open Peer commentaries on “performance-enhancing technologies and moral responsibility in the military”.Jessica Wolfendale - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (2):W4 – W6.
The Benefits and Risks of Quantified Relationship Technologies: Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Quantified Relationship”.John Danaher, Sven Nyholm & Brian D. Earp - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (2):3-6.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Analogical Reasoning in Handling Emerging Technologies: The Case of Umbilical Cord Blood Biobanking”: Analogy is Like Air—Invisible and Indispensable.Bjørn Hofmann, Søren Holm & Jan Helge Solbakk - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (6):W13-W14.
An Unbiased Response to the Open Peer Commentaries on “Does Consent Bias Research?”.Mark A. Rothstein & Abigail B. Shoben - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (4):W1 - W4.
Engaging With a Peer-Proposed, Additional Exploitation Condition: Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Transnational Gestational Surrogacy: Does It Have to Be Exploitative?”.Jeffrey Kirby - 2014 - American Journal of Bioethics 14 (5):W1 - W3.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “How to Do Research Fairly in an Unjust World”.Angela J. Ballantyne - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (6):4-6.
Response to open Peer commentaries on “why treat the wounded?”.Michael L. Gross - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (2):W1 – W3.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Assessing the Likely Harms to Kidney Vendors in Regulated Organ Markets”.Julian Koplin - 2014 - American Journal of Bioethics 14 (10):1-3.
Beyond a Dworkinean View on Autonomy and Advance Directives in Dementia. Response to Open Peer Commentaries on "Would We Rather Lose Our Life Than Lose Our Self? Lessons From the Dutch Debate on Euthanasia for Patients With Dementia".Cees Hertogh, Marike de Boer, Rose-Marie Dröes & Jan Eefsting - 2007 - American Journal of Bioethics 7 (4):4-6.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “The Ethical 'Elephant' in the Death Penalty 'Room”'.Michael Keane - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (10):5-6.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Bioethical Considerations in Translational Research: Primate Stroke”.Michael E. Sughrue - 2009 - American Journal of Bioethics 9 (5):W1-W3.
The Right to Know Your Genetic Parents: From Open-Identity Gamete Donation to Routine Paternity Testing.An Ravelingien & Guido Pennings - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (5):33-41.
Analytics
Added to PP
2019-01-26
Downloads
31 (#513,686)
6 months
8 (#353,767)
2019-01-26
Downloads
31 (#513,686)
6 months
8 (#353,767)
Historical graph of downloads
Author Profiles
References found in this work
The Human Right to Science and Foundational Technologies.Andrea Boggio & Calvin W. L. Ho - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (12):69-71.
The View of CRISPR Patents Through the Lens of Solidarity and the Public Good.Benjamin Capps, John J. Mulvihill, Yann Joly & Tamra Lysaght - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (12):54-56.
Patenting in the Public Interest: The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine Model.Audrey R. Chapman - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (12):61-63.
Laying the Foundation for Foundational Technologies.Joseph Spino - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (12):67-68.
Gene Patents and the Social Justice Lens.Colin Farrelly - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics 18 (12):49-51.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-64dd777598-cl5t5 uwo