ON CRISPR: The Story of Jennifer Doudna

Episode 3: Patent Wars

iHeartPodcasts & Kaleidoscope | Airdate: September 24, 2025

Main Theme:

This episode dives deep into the high-stakes, fast-paced competition—both collaborative and cutthroat—behind the patent disputes for CRISPR gene-editing technology. The episode explores the personalities, motivations, and pressures surrounding Jennifer Doudna and her collaborators (and rivals), focusing on who would be recognized as the true inventors of one of the greatest scientific breakthroughs of the century.

Key Discussion Points & Insights:

1. The “Celebrity” of Gene Editing: George Church

• [03:05–04:23]
  • Introduced as a superstar and mentor in synthetic biology, George Church is described as “the godfather of synthetic biology,” a mentor to both Jennifer Doudna and Feng Zhang.
  • Church’s style is painted as both eccentric and influential: “a true gentleman scientist wrapped in the cloak of being a madman scientist. ... He's just as comfortable at the lab bench as he is on the Colbert TV show.” (Walter Isaacson, 03:12–03:30)

2. The Race: From Test Tube to Human Cell

• [04:23–06:57]

  • In 2012, after Doudna and Charpentier’s landmark CRISPR paper, the contest was on to show the technique worked in human cells—not just test tubes.
  • Feng Zhang (Broad Institute, MIT/Harvard), another Church protégé, is introduced as a major competitor.

  Quote:

  • “So for the next six to seven months, you have a great race around the world of scientists trying to show how this new combination ... can edit human genes.”
    — Walter Isaacson [04:36]

  • The triangle of competition formed: Doudna vs. Zhang vs. Church, each with close personal and professional ties complicated by rivalry.

3. The Shift from Collaboration to Competition

• [07:06–08:13]

  • Early openness—Zhang emailing Doudna to discuss her results—gave way to secrecy as the stakes rose.

  Quote:

  • “Suppose there was no real competition and everybody worked together. Well, that would actually be friendlier and nicer. But maybe we wouldn’t have pushed science so far so fast if there wasn’t an award for getting there first.”
    — Walter Isaacson [07:38]

4. What Counts as Scientific “First”?

• [08:22–10:13]

  • Is it the breakthrough in the test tube or in a living cell that should be celebrated as the crucial leap?
  • Doudna argues for the test tube’s foundational importance, while Zhang highlights applied results in human cells.

  Quote:

  • “She would argue the big leap is figuring out the exact ingredients ... it wasn’t that big of a leap to do it in a cell. Now I think she’s minimizing the importance of doing it in a living cell. But that’s why there was a big dispute afterwards.”
    — Walter Isaacson [09:28]

5. The Publication & Patent “Finish Line”

• [10:21–13:41]

  • The scientists raced to publish first—Church and Zhang beat Doudna by just a week or two.
  • Publication date determines credit in the scientific community, but patent law operates by slightly different rules, focusing on who can prove priority.

  Quote:

  • “Close doesn’t count when it comes to patents or prizes.”
    — Walter Isaacson [11:28]

  • Lab notebooks, with discoveries logged and witnessed, become vital evidence in legal disputes.

6. Why Patent Gene-Editing Discoveries?

• [13:41–16:41]

  • The episode traces the history of patenting academic research, back to the days of Genentech's founding, and the Bayh-Dole Act, allowing universities and inventors to benefit from commercialization.
  • Isaacson emphasizes how this system both inspires rapid progress and funds further research.

  Quote:

  • “That patent ends up becoming the formation of this multi-billion dollar company, Genentech. [Now] patents become more important. America has a great system of allowing people to patent the type of research they did at universities…”
    — Walter Isaacson [14:01]
  • “It costs a lot of money to build that lab at Berkeley ... that’s a huge investment.”
    — Walter Isaacson [15:59]

7. Consortium or Competition? The Failed Truce

• [19:45–22:00]

  • After their near-simultaneous human-cell CRISPR papers, the major players briefly considered forming a joint company to share and commercialize their patents.
  • Tensions and mistrust—especially Doudna’s suspicion that Zhang and Church’s teams were excluding her from critical dealings—derailed this possibility.

  Quote:

  • “She just feels the guys are ganging up on me and I don’t want any part of this. And she pulls out.”
    — Walter Isaacson [20:45]

  • The episode notes the field’s ongoing complexity, with companies, universities, and researchers cross-licensing patents and navigating a complicated IP landscape—something that continues to this day.

8. Ethics, Honor, and the Nature of Scientific Competition

• [22:00–24:57]

  • Isaacson weighs in on whether Zhang was “Machiavellian” in his swift, secretive patent moves: not unethical per se, but not up to Church’s preferred standards of collegiality.

  Quote:

  • “Yes, what he did was in the bounds of all the rules of ethics, but it’s not the way I would have had him do it if he had still been part of my lab. ... There’s a system of honor that goes beyond the ethics of are you supposed to tell the other side...”
    — George Church via Walter Isaacson [22:42]

9. The Big Deal: What Made CRISPR So Revolutionary?

• [24:57–26:34]

  • What distinguishes CRISPR from earlier gene-editing? Programmability, speed, and ease—gene editing now as simple as “cut and paste” in a digital document.

  Quote:

  • “With CRISPR, you can instantly program it to cut wherever you want in the gene. ... This is the difference between being a monk ... and having an amazing cut and paste computer programming type thing...”
    — Walter Isaacson [25:18]

10. Scientific Credit and Narrative: Eric Lander’s “Heroes of CRISPR”

• [26:34–29:27]

  • Eric Lander’s published paper “Heroes of CRISPR” downplayed Doudna and Charpentier—leading to accusations of gender bias and conflict of interest since Broad Institute (Lander’s base) was in the patent fight.

  Quote:

  • “He minimizes what Jennifer Douden, Emmanuel Charpentier, does ... and then paragraph after paragraph on how important it was that Fong Zhang was able to make it work in the human cell. This causes only the type of controversy that can happen when you combine basic science with Twitter...”
    — Walter Isaacson [27:13]

• Isaacson found himself unexpectedly drawn into efforts to mediate, moderate, and clarify public perceptions in the escalating dispute.

11. Isaacson’s Role as Biographer and Mediator

• [29:27–31:46]

  • Isaacson reflects on balancing journalistic objectivity with honesty about his own involvement—sometimes literally brokering peace talks between key figures.

  Quote:

  • “As a reporter, I was trained to stay out of it, never to put yourself in a story. ... With the Jennifer Doudna book, I try not to insert myself in it unnecessarily. But at one point, Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuel Charpentier just are barely speaking to each other ... and I was just trying to see if I could make sure that there was no misunderstandings between them.”
    — Walter Isaacson [29:39]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “Close doesn’t count when it comes to patents or prizes.”
  — Walter Isaacson [11:28]

• “Suppose there was no real competition and everybody worked together. Well, that would actually be friendlier and nicer. But maybe we wouldn’t have pushed science so far so fast…”
  — Walter Isaacson [07:38]

• “She just feels the guys are ganging up on me and I don’t want any part of this. And she pulls out.”
  — Walter Isaacson [20:45]

• “Enzymes are catalysts. They cause things to happen and you have to be careful that you’re not distorting the narrative by being there, that you’re not too much of a catalyst.”
  — Walter Isaacson [31:08]

Timeline of Critical Segments

| Timestamp | Segment & Key Points | |-----------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 03:05 | Introduction to George Church’s outsized influence and personality. | | 04:23 | Race to apply CRISPR in a human cell, introduction of Feng Zhang. | | 07:06 | Competition grows fierce; collaboration gives way to secrecy. | | 08:22 | The debate about what counts as the crucial advance—the test tube or the living cell? | | 11:28 | Race to publish—Doudna narrowly misses being first. | | 13:41 | Lab notebooks and the nuances of IP “priority” and patent law. | | 14:01 | History of university research patents, Bayh-Dole Act. | | 19:45 | Attempt—and failure—to form a collaborative consortium for CRISPR commercialization. | | 22:23 | Ethical reflections on Zhang’s patent tactics and Church’s sense of scientific honor. | | 25:18 | Why CRISPR is as revolutionary as “cut and paste” for genes. | | 26:57 | Eric Lander’s controversial role in shaping the narrative and ensuing backlash. | | 29:39 | Isaacson discusses his complicated role as observer, story-shaper, mediator. | | 31:46 | Preview of next episode—focus on ethical dilemmas that follow the patent fights. |

Episode Tone and Style

The episode balances captivating storytelling with rigorous scientific and ethical analysis, propelled by Walter Isaacson’s warm, anecdotal style and Evan Ratliff’s journalistic curiosity. The tone is conversational and accessible but layered with tension, reflecting the competitive, sometimes personal drama that underpins massive advances in modern science.

Next episode: The ethical maze CRISPR gene editing opens up for humanity and for Jennifer Doudna personally.