Three years ago, we finalized our first CRISPR patent landscape analysis, at that time combined with an analysis of the TALE patent landscape which was then significantly larger. There were only 90 CRISPR patent families in this early analysis… that is less than the whole set of new CRISPR patent publications in the past single month: 116 additional patent families in our latest CRISPR patent analytics data set.
The past 24 hours have brought new light and significant moves in the complex CRISPR patent landscape.
First (that was in European time zone!), our CRISPR expert Fabien Palazzoli celebrated the 1000th CRISPR patent family extraction out of the worldwide published patent databases. Our next monthly update will actually feature more than 1050 classified and categorized CRISPR patent families – more than 10 times the initial set of our first landscape release back in summer 2014!
Our quarterly CRISPR patent landscape is now available. For this first release in 2016, we have included the latest business and technology developments, such as licensing deals information and a fully revisited breakdown of the functional and technical claim coverage. Our genomics expert Dr. Fabien Palazzoli has identified 489 CRISPR patent families out from worlwide patent registers, and systematically reviewed them down to individual claim wording to classify them into our unique, worldwide, independent CRISPR patent database.
In the meanwhile, facts and opinion papers around the Broad-Berkeley USPTO patent interference have been overloading our news monitoring capacity in the past 4 weeks… but that’s just about 2 pioneering families in the whole landscape. Here are 10 new facts out of the latest IPStudies CRISPR patent analytics – 489 CRISPR patent families as of January 2016:
Another outstanding pattern out of the CRISPR patent landscape is the complexity of inventorship and invention assignment tracking. The initial discoveries were conducted by multiple international teams; sometimes on their own, sometimes out of a formal collaborative research agreement, sometimes out of less formalized scientific research collaboration. This is again reflected in the resulting patent prosecution histories.