the article: http://www.genome-technology.com/issues/blog/general/141371-1.html
the patent: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=3&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=dna&s2=music&OS=dna+AND+music&RS=dna+AND+music But what do they hope to gain from this !?!?!? On 1/8/2007, "james jwm-art net" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >You forgot the link! > >I don't know much about this, but I thought that genetic music had >nothing to do with real extracted DNA, but merely (oh yes) the >algorithms used were said to be genetic, that is had characteristics of >DNA in the way they (the algorithms) evolved. > >james. > >On 1/8/2007, "marc garrett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>If a Patented Gene Appears in a Song, Who Gets the Royalty? >> >>"Sure, genetic music was the out-of-left-field off shoot of the Human >>Genome Project, but we can't deny that the field -- such as it is -- has >>shown surprising longevity. If you have a free minute, check out this >>newly issued patent. It covers "music generated by decoding and >>transcribing genetic information within a DNA sequence into a music >>signal having melody and harmony," according to the abstract. The >>inventors listed are a couple of lawyers (hence the title of this post)." >> >>more... >> >>_______________________________________________ >>NetBehaviour mailing list >>[email protected] >>http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> > >_______________________________________________ >NetBehaviour mailing list >[email protected] >http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
