Team:SDU-Denmark/safety-b

From 2010.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
(watermarking standard)
(watermarking standard)
Line 136: Line 136:
==== watermarking standard ====
==== watermarking standard ====
-
'''Watermarking'''
+
===== Watermarking =====
To increase public safety we propose to introduce a water-marking standard
To increase public safety we propose to introduce a water-marking standard
Line 353: Line 353:
[https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=12325 [3]]
[https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=12325 [3]]
 +
Once again please note that this is only intended as a guideline on how to characterize the part in the most wholesome manner.
-
''Copyright information''
+
'''Risk-assessment in conjunction with the use of this part in a particular organism.'''
-
It should contain all relevant copyright information, as to protect the intellectual property of the creating team. But what exactly is to be considered the subject of copyright? Is it the individual parts? Their functions? Or can one only claim copyright for the entire system? 
+
Should the part, or a number of parts, be inserted into an organism the team should perform a risk-assessment and make it available on the parts-registry. In some countries, it is mandatory to submit a risk-assessment prior to engaging in a project involving synthetic biology, so we believe that any risk-assessments should be made public through parts-registry.
-
''
+
'''Inclusion of copyright information?'''
-
Information on how to neutralize bacteria''
+
-
This clause is intended as security measure. Should the bacteria be released into the environment, the parts-registry site should contain information on how to neutralize the bacteria.
+
We do not believe in any form of copyright prohibition. We believe in an open-source approach to the field of synthetic biology, as in iGEM. Any copy-right prohibitions would only stall the progress in this most vital field of science. We believe that any and all information on created parts, and experience with these parts in particular organisms, should be shared freely.
-
If the bacteria has an kill-code inserted, the site should describe how to enact the self-destruct mechanism.
+
'''Information on how to neutralize bacteria'''
 +
 
 +
This clause is intended as security measure. Should the bacteria be released into the environment, the parts-registry site should contain information on how to neutralize the bacteria. If the bacteria has an kill-code inserted, the site should describe how to enact the self-destruct mechanism.
 +
 
 +
===== Anticipated problems =====
 +
 
 +
'''Code deterioration'''
 +
 
 +
The code will deteriorate over time due to mutation. This could prove to be a serious problem should watermarking become an integrated part of synthetic biology. Should the genetic watermark deteriorate to the point where one is no longer able to read it, it would not constitute any kind of safety measure, being able to tell that the part was likely to have been made artificially being the only thing we would be able to tell.
 +
 
 +
Knowing that data will deteriorate, it may be impossible to determine whether the watermark found in a rogue bacteria is authentic or a degenerate. The deterioration is however slow and arbitrary. Our code is so small, that the change that any nucleotide associated with the watermark is going to mutate is very limited. The chances of finding the authentic code intact should be very good.
 +
 
 +
'''The open source approach'''
 +
 
 +
Sharing all this information on creating new synthetic parts that can be inserted into living organisms, also means that people with harmful agendas have access to this knowledge. This naturally means that wrongful actions are possible by use of synthetic biology, but we do not think that this should stand in the way of all the possibilities synthetic biology holds. Also, the more we know about how to create synthetic DNA strands, the better we are equipped if any harmful incident should occur. As of now, it might also just be easier to drop a bomb or send out letters of anthrax.
 +
 
 +
Should a bacteria be used for a malign purpose it would be quite easy to insert a false watermark to blame others. So we need to keep in mind that a plot could be made against someone. However, if anyone was interested in harming as many as possible, this person probably wouldn’t care about watermarking at all. This also means that we cannot expect watermarking to play a part in any legal case.
==== kill-code ====  
==== kill-code ====  

Revision as of 14:58, 15 October 2010