yes

many signs pointing to this and now these questions to the whitehouse , man this could get insane

i listened to an expert discuss the issues going on with covid either way somethings not right
2. the link i posted was a patent posted by google patents, so idk wtf your talking about

i kinda feel sorry for lil raggedy ann

You can absolutely patent naturally occurring things. Almost all medications are naturally occurring isolates from soil or plants. Aspirin in particular is named after the aspirin tree from which it was taken.

I've listened to experts on infectious disease almost every week for the past year, since I work at a major medical institution with multiple infectious disease experts that are leading my organization's response to the pandemic. So if your bar is "I listened to experts", then I've got you hosed.

well the expert i listened to said you cannot, ill take his word over yours


either they patented something that naturally occurs in nature, which if true shouldnt be allowed its not legal, or 2. they created the virus and then patented it, which is what took place


This post was edited by darkhead69 on Feb 26 2021 09:12am

And who's your "expert" that you are touting? Just saying "I listened to an expert" is useless. I listened to 897 experts that said you can patent natural products. So I win right? I typed a bigger number of experts after all.

In reality, which is where I live, there are a ton of instances where you can patent a natural product. For instance if I isolate a naturally occurring compound, while I can't patent the compound in itself, I can patent a method to synthesize the compound, I can patent a use for the compound, I can patent the isolation method to get more of it, I can patent the mixing of this compound with another compound, etc. etc.

So while a supreme court ruling in 2016 (I think 13 years after the patent being discussed was filed) said you can't patent just natural products on their own, there's a bunch of exceptions that just kind of swallows the rule.

you already posted that link i already took a look at it
poor lil raggedy ann.

This post was edited by TiStuff on Feb 26 2021 09:16am

Nope. 897 experts said your wrong.

Also the supreme court case that limited patents of natural products only happened in 2016 so its irrelevant to a patent in 2003