A woman whose epilepsy was greatly improved by an experimental brain implant was devastated when, just two years after getting it, she was forced to have it removed due to the company that made it going bankrupt.

As the MIT Technology Review reports, an Australian woman named Rita Leggett who received an experimental seizure-tracking brain-computer interface (BCI) implant from the now-defunct company Neuravista in 2010 has become a stark example not only of the ways neurotech can help people, but also of the trauma of losing access to them when experiments end or companies go under.

  • pingveno@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    As part of unwinding a company that is going out of business, they usually do sell off their IP. That doesn’t mean that anyone will continue this particular experiment.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The same rule applies to whenever they sell the IP to. Whoever buys the IP should be legally obligated to continue the experiment as a condition of buying it. The alternative—putting the IP in the public domain—doesn’t do a lot for people who need active, ongoing support for a medical device, implanted in their body. I’d make a separate, stricter rule for that case. I don’t have a clear idea what that rule should be, though, because we can’t require a medical experiment to continue indefinitely if we want anyone to develop new medical devices.

      • pingveno@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        If you start adding on mandates to the IP like that, that severely narrows the list of companies that are even capable of buying it. They have to have employees with knowledge of the specific device, which only a small number of people may be using.