Property Rights
Legal Issues
Guidelines for Synthetic Microbes
Bio-safety and Bio-security
Testing Synthetic Microbes
Currently, this field of technology is shown as not needing heavy regulation and is self-regulated by the companies and researchers. President Obama, himself, asked the Presidential Commission of for the Study of Bioethical Issues to study and report back when Craig Venter first developed the first synthetic microbe in May 2010. This organization "thinks it imprudent either to declare a moratorium on synthetic biology until all risks can be determined and mitigated, or to simply ‘let science rip,’ regardless of the likely risks", according to the report the commission wrote to President Obama.
Despite the wave of criticism and dissent from the public including many environmental and investigative organizations, the synthetic biologist continue to regulate this field. Many, including Dr. Venter, supported the idea of self-regulation, believing in the consistent growth of this technology.
Whose Involved?
One of the major complications for the development of synthetic microbes is the almost certain abuse of power. Because of the highly expansive potential, many vie for the ability to control and maintain this power. Much of these people, however, are terrorists or monopolists, using this technology to further their selfish goals. This is a major conundrum because if the government intervenes to protect the technology, it could unintentionally inhibit the development of it. As a result, abuse of the synthetic microbe still looms large over many innovators.
Another pressing matter for this technology is the concept of testing. The best, most effective way to test the limits of synthetic microbes is to utilize them in an open environment. However, this is seen as unethical and immoral to a society that is globally warming up to the idea of saving the natural ecosystem. The only other option is to test in a simulate environment. The only problem is nature is made up of an infinite number of various environments and systems that might not benefit the microbe. This quandary has yet to be solved.
Another basic issue, yet also seemingly impossible to establish without constant backlash, is the governance of the synthetic microbe. Under what guidelines should the research and exploitation of this technology be required to follow? How are we able to set guidelines that will not inhibit the rapid growth of this technology?
One of the more simplistic, yet highly contested, legality issues of this ingenious technology is the right of ownership. Who has the power to control this technology? How are we to patent this technology without the development of power-hungry monopolies that could potentially blockade future advancements? Do we patent the manufacture of the DNA, the actual synthesis, and/or the product or process the microbe creates? Who deserves the intellectual property rights for synthetic microbes? Since is fairly recent, there have been no real laws protecting this technology so anything can happen.
