Here is a better source. Selected quotes:

Drosten, who has developed a diagnostic test using the virus from Erasmus MC, says that "anyone can use [the virus] for free." "What really shocks me is that the WHO seems to be buying into" the complaints, he says.

Memish says that the issue has not impeded research in Saudi Arabia itself, where most cases of the virus have been found.

Memish says that his main gripe is with the fact that Zaki sent a virus sample taken from a patient in Saudi Arabia to Rotterdam in the first place and that Erasmus MC has been able to file for patents as a result. "Samples were shipped outside of the country without the knowledge or permission of the Ministry of Health and I cannot believe that any country on this planet would allow this to happen," Memish says. Zaki says that he gave a sample from the same patient to the Saudi Ministry of Health first. "They tested for swine flu and did not continue," he told ScienceInsider yesterday. Only then did he reach out to Fouchier.

This lab is deciding who can develop a treatment, and what cut of it the Dutch lab will get. Is that your idea of a free market? They're controlling access to a virus

No, they're not. For fuck's sake, can't any of you read the goddamn article? (Slashdot editors included.)

They are not looking to be paid for their work in sequencing the virus, but to get a cut of any treatment that may be developed by controlling who is allowed to develop a treatment.

But because there isn't actually a patent on any of this, there is nothing that prevents anyone else from doing the sequencing themselves. This isn't rocket science - in fact it is trivial for any reasonably well-equipped biomedical research institution. Saudi Arabia is only unhappy because they want to retain exclusive rights, which of course is quite legal under international law, but if they actually cared about developing a cure, they'd already have their own sequence.

If they're claiming the rights to the virus

They (Erasmus University) aren't - read the article. All they're saying is, "if you want us to send you our data, you need to agree not to commercialize it without us, and you need to release us from legal liability." They're not claiming rights to the virus at all, only their own analysis. There is nothing preventing Saudi Arabia from performing their own analysis independently and completely ignoring the Dutch. In fact, what's really going on here is that Saudi Arabia wants to hold on to any intellectual property rights deriving from the virus, and they're concerned that the Dutch may fuck that up. If people die as a result, the fault lies entirely with the Saudi government for dropping the ball.

The article is completely and wildly off the mark, and the summary is confusing the issue even more, if that's even possible.

This is at least an improvement over the previous article on the same subject, which didn't even identify which IP claims were causing problems. But I agree, there is some incredibly sloppy reporting going on here. I realize that the storyline of "evil Western profiteers kill people with patents" is very tempting for lazy journalists and activists, and there are genuine problems with the patenting of gene sequences, but that's not even what's going on here. This is purely a case of bureaucratic infighting and ass-covering, and the article couldn't point to a single instance where Erasmus University actually prevented anyone from researching towards a cure.

Javascript can certainly cause a lot of problems, but none of them are really related to it being non-free. Sticking a GPL on top of the Javascript code doesn't really solve anything. It doesn't make webpages more accessible or machine readable, it doesn't make it load faster, it doesn't make it run faster and it doesn't even make it easier to modify. If the server starts to ship on updated Javascript my Greasemonkey scripts would break just the same no matter if the Javascript is GPL or not. Lots of the time the Javascript code isn't even code that does something interesting, but just used for transition animations and such because CSS3 is not yet ready for widespread use.

I think the FSF should better spend their time on advocating good web practices, encourage people to provide APIs for their websites, make sure that data can be important and exported from the cloud and such. If it's Free Software or not doesn't really matter, as while it runs on your computer, you don't really control it either way, as it all depends on what kind of data the server ships to you. If the data format from the server changes, all your Free Software Javascript would be rendered useless.

Either they must actually control spending, or they must suck down federal dollars or be selling some public good to make up the difference.

In partial defense of Texas, it is one of the few "red states" that actually contributes more in federal taxes than it takes in federal spending (like California and the majority of "blue states"). It may be a pain in the ass, and it may have inflicted the worst president of my lifetime on the country, but at least it's pulling its weight, economically speaking.

So, in Texas, police still can arrest you for, in the privacy of your own home, consensually sticking your dick in places that are considered perfectly normal in most developed countries

Actually, they can't do this any more, thanks to the US Supreme Court. Last time I checked, though, the state GOP still endorses such laws in their official platform. But hey, at least gay people can carry shotguns in public - that's real freedom, not the phony faggoty liberal kind of freedom!

the majority of Texans value freedom and values over a strong central government and political correctness

This is the state that defended its law criminalizing sodomy to the Supreme Court in 2003, and whose GOP still supports the (now unconstitutional) law. Which means that a majority of Texans are happy to jettison freedom as soon as it conflicts with their (religious) values.

I'm wondering if a planet like Earth would be capable of developing and sustaining life without a sun, let's say 200 meters or so below the surface.

There is actually a huge amount of biomass beneath the seabed - all anaerobic prokaryotic microbes, as far I know. Deep sea volcanic vents are another major ecosystem. So it may be theoretically possible to develop terrestrial life without a sun (and certainly possible without direct light), but liquid water is still an absolute requirement, and geothermal heating is probably very important too.

The USSR did not steal nuclear weapon technology from the USA.

Oh, really? (And that's hardly the only example.)

this is only Slashdot. It is not a NASA (or some other space agency) forum. It is not a gathering place for the great minds of science, of the internet or even of basement dwellers.

Oh, I know that, it's just that I love a good intense scientific discussion, and there are a reasonable number of people who read Slashdot who have actually thought seriously about the subject, even if only for their own amusement. So it's still a little depressing to see so much cluelessness on display. After all, some of these people surely vote...

there were thousands of reliable documented UFO sightings covered up by the US government with such ridiculous explanations as 'moonlight reflecting off of swamp gas'

Put yourself in their shoes for a moment. You're testing supersonic spy planes in an era where our largest adversary had successfully stolen nuclear weapons research from us, and you're trying to stop the local yokels from asking too many questions about the unimaginably fast, jet-black craft that keep whooshing overhead. What do you tell them that will shut them up, without saying "we're testing top-secret spy planes that will overfly the Soviet Union"?

If extraterrestrials really did visit Earth as often (and for as long) as you claim, btw, there would be actual hard evidence. There is none. The simplest explanation is that a) people freak out when confronted with rapid technological change, and b) the human brain is a superb pattern-finding machine - so good that it often finds patterns where none exist. And if we're going to treat ancient Hindu scrolls as reliable documentary evidence, why not just take the Book of Genesis at face value too, and have the government stop funding evolution research? (Or medical research, for that matter - clearly divine intervention can cure disease more effectively than modern medicine.)

Every time Slashdot posts a story about the search for extraterrestrial life, at least a half-dozen scientifically illiterate people complain (often quite stridently) that NASA (or whoever) is too narrow-minded because they're only looking at signs of terrestrial-like (carbon-based, oxygen-metabolizing) life. And every comment of this sort gets at least another half-dozen replies, from people who actually know at least a little bit of science, explaining, very patiently, that we have no idea what other forms of life might look like, chemically speaking, no way of knowing if such life forms exist, and thus no way of detecting their presence. It's so predictable, and so inane. This is one of the most fascinating open questions in modern science, but these threads simply get clogged up by idiots upset that NASA hasn't considered their ill-informed speculation.

No where in any of this is there actually a single reference to a single IP, person, or company that is interfering with research.

I agree, it is entirely unclear from the article whether any IP claims have been put forth, or if this is some kind of pre-emptive action. I think gene patents are truly evil, and pharma companies can be truly sleazy at times, but I'd like to see some actual evidence before pointing fingers in this case.