Free Memorandum in Opposition to Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3200-9v—O0705—CFD 4 Document 137=7 e Filed osu 1/2005 .» Page--1 of 2 » --
. r ‘ ° ` . _ ." -4 .... ky _
4 I ' · . . I ` I- ` _ · 4 · _· .%,5;. I
*3 4 4 · Haro\d_Varmus@nilng0v,11I19I99 10:20 AM·0400, Fwd: Notes __ fz
L ··‘` ‘ _ nm: ¤uo1d_va¤ns!aih.g¤v ` · __ · ‘ 4 44 3
i .‘ '_% "=; x-sender: nih\va¤•us!ces4 .n£h.gov j -_
~. ·' Dl£82.FI£, l9 Nov 1999 10:20:12 -0400 - '
‘ * 1*0: bwaterst!watson.u¤sst1.edu ' _
. . A ‘ Subject: Pwd: ` _
T9 » . , ` . _ _ . _
i ` · >¤atc: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 10:15:28 -0400 4 ;
1 · >*l•o: hwaters!alu.uust1.edu 4 _ _ _
E _ >?raa: ¤arold_Va¤a1s!¤ih.gov _ _ ,
>$ubject: Pwd: `Hotes . __ . . ` _
4 >Gc: · {
4 >¤cc: _ _ `
.4 5 >x-Attachments: zuard ¤rive:l34654:su¤mary of convers-11/14.rt: zllard 4 -
>J ; >Drive:l14654:s¤mary of conversations-11: _ 4 _ , . _
L · > ' ‘ ' _
é · . 4 _> ‘ I
f `>Bob: Here is trio'; auvaary plua a few additional cmnents. · _’
Q ° _ >Francis (who is coordinating the call today) says it will occur at 4 _ _ ;‘
é >3PMourtimeandhiasecretarywllllnooky¤1up. Ihopewecando ·
- >it within 30 minutes, for your sake and nlnc. Eric will be on a · 4
4 4 >boatonhisvacation3Ihopethisworks. _ . · .’ _
J > . · ·
t >You should know that I don't Iagree with everything in the summary. · _`
; >1’or instance, though it my be impolitic to say this in the spirit ` _ V
i >o£ negotiations, I an not ready to acknowledge that Celera could put - ·
>the human sequence together without the public effort. ·
; >
· >After our talk last night, I an especially anxious that today we
J _ _>achieve clarity on two points: the reasons a collaboration would be
’ § L Q; >in our interests and the reasons we would have to reject it. 4 ’ ._
· r > -
_. hr > { _
> ` 4
> r
>>From: Eric Lander
4 _ >>’l‘o: 'Colljns, Francis (NHGRI)" , _
>> "var¤us, Harold ((1))*
_ >>subject: Notes `
4 >>Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 15:27:57 -0500 `
I >> `
>> _ .
>>Dear Francis and Harold:
>> . .. . ‘ `
1;, ?>!-Znclosed is a *draft•.of the notes that I would like to circulate. '(I i
>>have also enclosed lu'? fomat, in case you encounter any problua opening ‘ ‘ ‘ ` ?
= >>the Nord document). _ · 4 _ . j
· ` - >> . . 4 ` · ` ‘_r
. >>I apologize for the delay in sending them and for being out of-unail . ` ` `
` -. 44 >>cont/act. My portable computer had an unfortunate accident with some
‘ >>onion soup on the first day on my vacation and it has taken IlY_ three ‘ ·
>>days to get functional again! _ . 4 ·• '
) . ‘ >> 4 _ · Q
_ >>It would be good for us to discuss these notes •soon*, and then to have · .` _ _ 3
>>me circulate them to Celera before our call on Sat. ·
>> ' 4 ‘
>>; could talk late on Wed if you get this in time or else on Thurs. Let 4
>>me know how the three of us can connect. ‘
>> ‘
_ >>Francis: In your csail, you raised a concern about granting Celera a `
-4 >>'m0n0p0ly" and about whether we could get them to release the data with
· >>no restriction on use by other database suppliers. ‘ . ·~ `
Printed for Bob Watcrston _ · `1

. ·’·T:%E{j·
` RW OOO 1 7

Case 3:00-cv-00705-CFD ·
Document 137 7 Fnled 03/11/2005 Page 2 Or 2
[email protected], 11/19/99 10:20 AM -0400, Fwd: Notes __ 2
>>
>>Let me make a few observations:
>>
>>l. we would be agreeing to collaborate with Celera on merging our data
>>sets, provided that the data itself would be freely available to any
>>scientist. The DVD would carry a restriction against repackaging the
>>database into another conmercial database. However:
E; >> o It would not prevent any other conmercial database supplier
>>from using all publically generated data.
>> o It would not prevent the public HG? from continuing to
>>generate human sequence and put it into the public domain without
>>restriction. (We could not dump the data from the DVD, but we can and
>>should keep sequencing.)
>> o we would be glad to enter into precisely the same arrangement
W >>with any other company —- such as Incyte willing to put its data on a
~ >>DvD and make it available to scientists.
>> Realistically, Celera would be doing more for the scientific
>>community than Incyte or HGS by making the data itself available: this
:>>would be a significant contribution. Celera would be trying to gain a
>>significant advantage over corrmercial database suppliers by preventing
>>them for sucking up their data. This is not unreasonable, since they _
>>did pay for it. I am willing to countenance this, provided that (i) i·:
V1 >>doesn`t stop us from continuing to our goal of putting the human
>>S&quenC€ in the public domain to allow competition among
>>database/analytical tool suppliers. and (ii) we are willing to make tue
>>same deal with any other company.
>>
>>2. I don't think that Celera will have any interest in the alternative
>>proposals that you mention. I have tried these with them and, while tney
~) >>do agree that they will remove all restrictions at some date, they are
Y >>thinking more like 2005. In any case, I don't see what moral suasion we `
>>have to move them to release it earlier -· inasmuch as this is the heart
>>of their business plan. ·
>>
>>bet‘s talk about all this.
>>
>>with best regards,
‘ >>Eric
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
J

Printed for Bob Waterston 2
RW 0001 8