I&#x27;d suggest reading a bit farther into the article:<p>&quot;[Rouleau] says the kind of early-stage science that the institute does is not really worth protecting. “There is a fair amount of patenting by people at the institute, but the outcomes have not been very useful,” he says, adding that the institute would rather provide data that others could use to develop patentable medicines. “It comes down to what is the reason for our existence? It&#x27;s to accelerate science, not to make money.&quot;<p>I think the main point is that most scientific discoveries don&#x27;t need to make it through some regulatory process, because they are knowledge (and not technology).  I think CRISPR is a good example of something that <i>does</i> benefit from that model, though.