"Exploring the Intersection of Intellectual Property and Emerging Bioactive Compounds in Cannabis and Psychedelics" Ross O'Brien from Bonaventure Equity, is joined by Mike McCormick, a chemist and expert in intellectual property (IP) within the cannabis and psychedelics industries. They discuss the significance of patents and how they grant exclusivity to inventions, emphasizing that patents can be obtained for compounds even if they are illegal, as long as they meet patentability criteria. They delve into the process of protecting IP through patents, the importance of derivatives to modify existing molecules, and the potential value of proprietary compounds in the cannabis and psychedelics sectors. Produced by PodConx
"Exploring the Intersection of Intellectual Property and Emerging Bioactive Compounds in Cannabis and Psychedelics"
Ross O'Brien from Bonaventure Equity, is joined by Mike McCormick, a chemist and expert in intellectual property (IP) within the cannabis and psychedelics industries. They discuss the significance of patents and how they grant exclusivity to inventions, emphasizing that patents can be obtained for compounds even if they are illegal, as long as they meet patentability criteria. They delve into the process of protecting IP through patents, the importance of derivatives to modify existing molecules, and the potential value of proprietary compounds in the cannabis and psychedelics sectors.
Ross O'Brien - https://www.linkedin.com/in/rossobrien/
Bonaventure Equity - https://link.bve.vc/Visit-Us
Mike McCormick - http://linkedin.com/in/mikemccormickphd
[00:00:00] Welcome to another episode of Cannabis Capital, the podcast. I'm your host, founder of Equity Venture Capital firm. Investor, entrepreneur, and author of Cannabis capital of the book. Um, so be sure to get your copy wherever good books are sold or any books are sold. Love doing these podcasts. It's a great way for us to share with all of you the key thought leaders and experts, uh, founders that we're working with in the space.
As we try to really unpack and go beyond the, the green rush, go beyond the headlines and really dig into what's happening in the cannabis economy and more broadly, life sciences strategy. I'm really excited to have, uh, a conversation today with Mike McCormick. Mike is [00:01:00] a partner with us, uh, at our firm, at our fund.
Um, he's worked with several of our portfolio companies and is really a fantastic expert in approach to the world of intellectual property, and also happens to have the unique distinction of being a chemist by, by, by training. So excited to welcome here, Mike McCormick. Welcome Mike. Thanks Ross.
Appreciate it. Yeah, appreciate It's good to be here. Appreciate your time as always. I'm sure people are gonna have their minds blown. Just like all the conversations that we have at the best place to start, let's go through a little bit of your background, talk about how you got into intellectual property more, more broadly, and your scientific background and, and sort of the pathways into, uh, this emerging space.
Sure thing. Yeah. So as you mentioned, I'm a chemist by training. Um, I, uh, pursued, I got an undergraduate degree in chemistry and one in biochemistry from the University of Michigan. Went straight from there to m I t where I got a PhD in chemistry and focused on particularly [00:02:00] crystallography and studying enzyme function and structure.
After that, I moved on to, uh, the Scripps Research Institute here in San Diego where I am now. That's when I started to get into the, the world of cannabis research in particular because at Scripps in Ray Stevens lab, I was, uh, pursuing x-ray crystal structures of the cannabinoid receptor, specifically was the focus, but two as well.
Um, and so I started a lot of the early work that ultimately led to that, uh, structural characterization while I was working there. But that having already been interested in cannabis and psychedelics my entire adult life, I found it like a nice connection to be actually working on that as a chemist.
And so that was very exciting, especially because back. 2012 or so, there was not a lot of knowledge around, you know, or research being done in cannabis at all compared to now. Here we're 10 years later and there's a lot more stuff happening. So that was sort of my introduction to the world of cannabis science research.
But after my postdoc [00:03:00] and being tired of being a poor academic, I decided that I, I, I needed a better paying job. So I Boston and started working as a technical advisor. Or technology specialist is what some of the firms call, call the, the position at some big corporate law firms that do patents for, for pharmaceutical companies and small time inventors and everything in between.
And so, so I spent four years doing that training in the world of patent prosecution and IP protection, particularly as it pertain to chemical inventions, specifically drug molecules. And how they're used. And so got excellent training, particularly at a law firm called Choate in Boston, which is a, a powerhouse prosecution firm.
Um, so I got excellent training there and a lot of exposure to how, uh, for big pharma in particular protects their chemical inventions. So that, uh, you know, it's my background in, in science and I. And after spending time in ip, uh, and doing that kind of, uh, legwork, I, I decided that I, I liked the client facing [00:04:00] portion of it more and, uh, and the, the, the strategy in science rather than the actual writing of patent applications and, and arguing of patent offices.
And so I moved into cannabis consulting in the, in the cannabis industry and now psychedelics as well. Um,
And applying both my knowledge of chemistry and biochemistry with, uh, my experience in knowledge in IP to help, uh, particularly startup cannabis and psychedelic companies, uh, transfer their technology into something that's more commercializable and specifically protect, uh, things, uh, with, with, um, patents and, and other forms of IP protection.
So right place, right time. Super interesting. Talk to us a little bit about, uh, what intrigued you from a technology standpoint and technology in this context, meaning new scientific discoveries, new innovations, like, you know, cannabis and psychedelics certainly feels to us like we're just scratching [00:05:00] the surface to try to uncover what's there.
So,
Compounds that are anecdotally known for, for generations, even thousands of years to, to have medicinal benefits. But at the same time, we have, you know, things like the US government telling us that they have absolutely no medicinal value. Um, and there's been historically tons of red tapes surrounding even doing research on cannabis or psychedelics.
And so despite the fact that so many out there know of the benefits, um,
From the use of psychedelics or cannabinoids. Um, it's, it's only recently with the, the, the wave of legalization that's opened the doors for, for more research. And for me in particular as a, as a, a chemist and somebody with classical training and, and experience and in [00:06:00] biotech, in the legal world, the idea of working in a space that's completely,
uh, When I learned that, that Johns Hopkins, this, this was years back, had had started this research program surrounding psychedelics. I mean, here we have the best, or one of the best medical schools in the world now, opening their doors to psychedelics and, and running incredible, uh, studies. I mean, the, the thing that really shocked me, which I mean, I guess that, that the, the study was done, not the results of the study, but the fact that John Hopkins, um, testing SSRIs antidepressant.
Antidepressant.
Found that they could achieve all of that and more from like once every six months to once every six week type doses [00:07:00] of psilocybin. So that sort of opening up of the scientific world and, and getting it out in the open in that way with such a strong institution told me that, all right, I can do this.
Like we can bring this stuff off the streets, if you will, and into the pharmacy so that people Interesting. Mike. One of the questions I get a lot, or at least people seem to be talking about is, can you patent something that's illegal? And when we're looking at schedule one substances and you bring up exactly, you know, the point or schedule one by definition says there's no medical necessity.
But now we're starting to see F D A approvals in both cannabis and we haven't.
Walk us through the purpose of protecting your IP with a patent. What, what constitutes novel technology? What does the patent office do when they look at new things? And in particular with cannabis, how, how does the Federal [00:08:00] Illegality piece play into this? Sure. So I mean, one of the things is the basics around a patent.
People know that they can have value. I think most people, but what a lot of people don't realize, I think, is that, is that what a patent gives you is the right to exclude others from doing what's described in your patent. The exchange is this, the inventors tell the world publicly disclose all the details of their invention and how to make and use it.
And in exchange those inventors or, or, uh, the companies to which their, their rights are assigned, get a approximately 17 year monopoly on that technology and those specific uses as it's described in the patent. And so, so that can of course be incredibly valuable and you can think of a long list of pharmaceutical compounds.
From everything. You know, I, I always think along the lines of drugs, but if you think about things such as simple as like a windshield wiper on, on a car, incredibly valuable patent. Um, and so, so, so that's, having a patent doesn't give you the monopoly. Having a patent gives [00:09:00] you the legal ability to others who try to do your thing.
Are. And so if you're in a space where other people are going to be competing and, and trying to do the same thing as you, then it's best to have that patent and get it as early as possible, and so that you can either license that technology to others that wanna use it or you can exclude them from, from doing that kind of stuff.
And so, so it's important to note that that's, that's the, the, the reason for getting a patent is to share this technology with the world in exchange for a significant term of a monopoly on it. Just so, yeah. This is an interesting point. It's interesting that you brought up the windshield wipers. 'cause there's a famous story about the, the inventor that the car companies just infringed on his IP for years and years.
Destroyed him to fight it. He ended up winning in the end. But, you know, there's a, there's a saying in the the venture world, right, especially at an early stage, in some respect, the patent's value is largely predicated on your ability to defend it. Right. Absolutely. So [00:10:00] when you think about, you know, litigating for, you know, some position and having some monopoly or exclusivity around it, this sounds like this is not a game for every company to play.
Absolutely. I mean, it's, it can be, and in a way it should be. And that's the, you know, the basics of patent law, even as they stand today in America, were written into the Constitution by our, the founding Fathers. And the idea was that we need to promote innovation. And the way to do that is, is to, to give those innovators a big chunk of the, the, the glory and the cash that comes from those innovations.
And so, you know, it's, it's in this, in that same spirit. The idea is that anybody who invents something should be able to, to protect that invention. And it shouldn't matter how much money you have. And that's why, for example, the, the patent office tiers the fees for things. If I'm gonna go as a solo inventor, I can apply for a patent.
I don't, I don't need an attorney or a patent agent. If I am the inventor, I'm one of the few people that. [00:11:00] If I'm inventor, then I, I have to have, uh, somebody else, uh, do that, uh,
Um, but, uh, and, and so, so that's the thing, Ross. The, the, the spirit of patent law is that every, everyone who invents something should be able to protect that invention. And, and if you are a solo inventor or a smaller organization, the patent office will be a little nicer to you in the the prosecution process.
Most often kind of help people along. Um, and, uh, you know, whereas, whereas the flip side is if you're a huge organization, then you could throw tons of applications at the patent office and have lots of arguments and, you know, sort of fight your way, which of course costs a lot because it's in, in legal fees.
So, so the reality of it is that yes, if you have more money, you're, you're more likely to be able to get a patent because. Bring the force of, of, uh, lots firms.[00:12:00]
You're, you're, you're asking the, the, the patent office for this exclusivity. And their job is to tell you that you're not gonna get it. Their job is to reject, particularly in the us uh, US P t o examiners are paid based on the number of rejections that. They make more money if they give fewer patents.
And so, so their job is to find out, you know, why your, your invention is either not novel, uh, not, uh, inventive enabled or obvious. And so that's what their job is to do. And so they go out and find references, things that are already out there in the public that they say, anticipate your invention and therefore it.
Since you asked about legality, I wanna touch on that real quick. Yeah. That's where I wanted to go, Mike. Despite the fact that, that, uh, the US P T O is a, a federal organization, they do not care if your thing is legal or not. There are a few exceptions that you, you can't go build a new atomic bomb.
There's like a [00:13:00] specific, uh, Specific bar for, for patentability. If you're, if you're building like some sort of weapon of mass destruction, you're, you're not gonna get a patent on that. They, they don't want that kind of information to be public. So there are a few things that are, you can't get a patent because they're illegal.
But when it comes to things like drugs, they don't care. You can get a patent, you can, you can get a patent and cover that. You may never, ever be able that thing. Um, because.
Is it enabled? Can, can a person do your thing when you describe it? And is it non obvious? Meaning that, can I just combine A with B to get your invention? C, as long as your invention fits that bill, it doesn't matter if it's illegal or not, you can get that patent. But this is where the trick comes in, especially in the, in the, the challenge comes in for, for cannabis and psychedelics companies.
Is that all right, so I'm gonna go spend a bunch of money and get a patent to treat, say, depression with psilocybin, for example, or something. Then once I have that patent, which will be three years or so after filing the first application, if, [00:14:00] if all goes well, then uh, are you gonna be able to sell that product if it contains something that's illegal?
That's a, it's a good question. And the answer to that from my view, comes from chemistry, and that's where derivatives come in. And so let's say, I know psilocybin works well for depression, then why don't I make a slight modification to psilocybin, do some chemistry on it so that it's essentially the same compound in a lot of ways and has the same effects, but as suddenly a new entity, a new, a new chemical.
And that thing is not illegal, or at least not yet. That's where the IP world kind of thrives is, is in derivatives, especially when it comes to these kind of drugs, is that not just individual compounds that come from cannabis or, or psychedelics, but new compounds that are inspired by their, by their structure and their functionality.
And uh, and that's where the lab work comes in. Well, you know, Mike, I learned something from you every time we talk. This is really, really fascinating. I wanna, um, Synthesize it,[00:15:00]
something. If you can chemically modify this molecule that occurs in nature and reproduce it with similar effect, it becomes proprietary to you, and that is something that could be potentially patentable. Definitely. Okay. That situation is, is ideal because new compounds, there's no data on them, there's nobody else.
I mean, unless somebody else happens to have made that same derivative in a different lab. There, there's no data on them. So there's not, there's not things that an examiner can grab from, from scientific literature, patent literature and say, somebody else has already done this. No one's even seen this compound.
Isn't the data a double-edged sword? Right? So there's no data from a patent application standpoint, meaning that that is one less thing that the examiner can point to, to reject the patent. However, without the data though, You can't actually get a, actually show the performance of the patent, right? Is that, and these are layman's terms, so maybe you should walk us through the sort of [00:16:00] steps of the filing, right?
So, so, okay. So with an example, like, like a natural compound that exists and there's anecdotal knowledge or even some research around it showing that it, it does X, y, or z. That kind of stuff exists for compounds and published, but if you are working on something inhouse, like let's say I'm a a psychedelics company and I'm making derivatives and no one knows about them outside the company, then I can go and hire a contract research organization.
Do biological assays or I can work with a academic lab, say at, you know, any of universities and get, uh, uh, you know, or, or do that work inhouse. I can go hire a biochemist and set up a lab and do those assays and never publish any of that stuff because it's, it's happening within a company and, and the interest is in money and.
Publications, and so no one would know about the data showing that your drug works for, for this, that, or the other thing. Um, because, because as a company, if you're doing this internally or doing it with the, the help of A C R O, then uh, [00:17:00] you can keep all that confidential prior to, to obtaining patents on it.
And then once you file, then you could publish all the stuff that you like because you're already ahead in terms of a date on, uh, the public disclosure of, of. So let's think about, there's a lot of founders that listen to this podcast and let's, um, focus on cannabis for, for a second. I've, let's say I'm out there, I've got a cannabis startup, um, and I'm trying to create a new topical cream for.
You know, whatever indication may be, let's say hair loss, because I know there's a dynamic to hair loss that you explained to me. Yeah. Let's take that rabbit hole just in a second. But let's say I'm developing a new topical me cannabis company. How should I approach assessing what. Potential is to have intellectual property.
How should I think about protecting that intellectual property? What is the process? What are the pros and [00:18:00] saying something has. Yeah, so I mean, there's the, the best way to, to answer that question at that early stage would be to do a patent literature search. There are outside organizations that can do this, individuals such as myself, that can, that can do this kind of work.
But it's, it's to basically use, uh, sophisticated searching tools to look at what's out in the patent literature, things that are published, applications and issued patents to see if somebody else has already, has already done. Sometimes it's, it's so new that, that, especially in cannabis and psychedelics, that you're just seeing applications and so, so you know that somebody out there is trying to get a patent on, on something, but you don't know exactly if they're gonna get it yet.
And so that sort of patentability or novelty or patent landscape search is the kind of thing that, that you can do to, to see what else is out there. So, but, but I mean, that's one approach. Another approach is to say, look, I have this topical, it works. I know it works. I know how to make it, I know [00:19:00] exactly what's in it.
If you understand your, your product or, or your invention to that degree, and you don't know, obviously of anybody else out there that's made it, I mean, usually if you're working in a space, like say examples, like something like that you probably know of companies that make. If you're in a situation where you've got something and there's something special about about it compared to what's out there, or as far as you know, it's new, sometimes the best option is just to go ahead and file an application towards that and not worry about what else is out there.
Because the thing is, especially when, when you're not looking at patent applications with, with experienced eyes and, and you can basically get scared, scared off because else,
But it, it's, it really has to, everything has to go through patent prosecution procedures.
Searching can be informative, but it can also, uh, you know, sort of mess up the, the approach. And if you really think you've gotten avention and as far as you know, from, from your [00:20:00] experience as expertise in whatever field you're in, then it can be good to go ahead and pursue an application. There are ways to, to jump out of the process, which is expensive, especially if you're doing it right along the way.
If you get something back from an examiner in a first round of examination that says, Hey, here's all.
Call. You might have already spent 30 or 40,000 on prosecution, but you know this. Why this?
Go down this, they see these huge dollar amounts and a lack of certainty in the end. Um, but this is just how you gotta do, it's how big Pharma does it. Well, so that's, so that's interesting. We'll get back to Big Pharma now too. So we've gotta talk about loss and big pharma. But when you think about these strategies, Patents are just one component of a broader sort of intellectual property and, and business plan, right?
So patents, which are different from trademarks, right? But there's [00:21:00] trade secrets, right, which are different than patents. Then you've got, you know, the research that's required, right? So there's a lot of moving parts to this. Talk a little bit about the, the research. I think that's important as well because, you know, there's individual inventors, but.
You have when you file a provisional patent as you've, you know, shared. There's a a period of time where you have to go through this process. It could be upwards of three years, but at some point in particular, when you start looking at, uh, chemistries, there has to be some scientific rigor that, that proves that this, this.
Actually works, right? That's right. Yeah. I mean, your, your invention has to be described. I mean, this is a, another one of these handles that an examiner can reject you on. There's something called a written description requirement, which means that you have to describe your invention so well, that anybody who is of, of ordinary skill in the art in that field could pick up this document alone.
[00:22:00] Know everything that they need to do to reproduce your work or make your thing. And so if you're talking about a molecule that's been synthesized in a laboratory, all of the synthetic steps need to be spelled out in detail. The characterization that at, at the end of making that compound, that proves that that's what it is, needs to be included in the, in these patents.
And so, so, yes, so, so you need to, to fully understand and be able to invention to.
Patent protection will only extend so far. Like you'd, so you talked about, you know, in trying to invent a new, you know, nuclear fusion Right. Or, uh, weapon. But you also shared something with me that that was really novel. That there are certain things that the patent office just assumes is impossible.
Right. And it turns out yes, hair growth or hair loss treating hair loss is one of them. Is that right? That's right. Yeah, that's right. I mean, so one of the best examples is perpetual motion machine. I mean, every year the patent office receives applications for [00:23:00] perpetual motion machines, and it's the type of thing that they just won't waste their time on.
And so there's this, this idea of incredible utility. And, and there was a time, particularly in the nineties when, when. Pharmaceutical companies would develop a drug and they wanna make sure that they cover every possible use of that drug. So let's say I invent a headache medicine, I don't want somebody else to come around and end up finding out that that's a really good allergy medicine and uh, and patenting it for that use.
And so, When pharmaceutical companies have a new compound and they have an idea of what it will work on, they obviously pursue protection for that type, type of use or to treat that indication, but also to throw in some other indications. And, and one of the ones that's always been in there is hair loss.
And so even if I have a, a new cancer drug, and that's what it's about, there was a time when, when everybody would also throw in, oh yeah, it be used because wouldn't jackpot functional. Here regrowth compound. You make a shit money, but of.[00:24:00]
And so, so one fun fact, it's incredible utility. Incredible utility. Yeah. And so, so one fun fact about this is used to be heavier than air flight was, uh, was one of these things. And it wasn't until the Wright brothers went to pursue a patent, uh, on their plane, uh, that, that they turned that around. And, and in that case, the patent office ma actually made them fly the plane, uh, in front of the patent office.
So,
Could fly. And so it's possible to, to turn around these incredible utility, uh, bars to patentability. But uh, so what we need now is a perpetual cannabis machine. Yeah, exactly. That's okay. Who's out there working on that? Um, so, so that's super interesting. Uh, and when you think about the hurdles that have to be overcome, um, In your experience, uh, and in particular looking at it through [00:25:00] the pharmaceutical lens, chemistry lens and, you know, biotech, where are the biggest, um, opportunities and where are the biggest challenges in the cannabis arena?
Yeah. So I think the biggest opportunities are, are in the, the derivative space. Okay. And so, so there, everybody's already out there pursuing extraction procedures and, and patents on extraction procedures and combinations of, of cannabinoids and individual cannabinoids. And that, that's already, that's already done.
Uh, and, and so, so the next wave is to actually make compound that. I mean, there, there's, there's promise in the minor cannabinoids. So basically digging out some of those, those cannabinoids that have 0.01% of the biomass of, of a cannabis plant. Um, some of those rare things haven't been studied and could have incredible utility, uh, if you will.
Um, but, uh, but that's not known yet. And so, so accessing those compounds is difficult. You can't extract those away in sort of [00:26:00] economic, and so you're,
Any cannabinoid, uh, a target cannabinoid, then you can easily make slight modifications and, and go after that. And, and it's for, the reason I described earlier is that it's like when you have a new compound, it's not illegal, it's not been patented, it's, it's all new and you can, uh, sort of own, uh, that, that kind of, uh, uh, compound and so, so derivative in.
Combination therapeutics are where I'm gonna take one compound instead of just one molecule to treat a disease. I'm gonna take two. You know, a, a perfect example of this is, uh, Epidiolex, you know, it's just a CBD to TC ratio. It's two compounds. Uh, a lot of drugs that historically things like, you know, over the counter things, allergy medicines, cancer, drugs, they're, they're individual compounds.
But nowadays, that's not enough to, to, to get intellectual property [00:27:00] coverage on those compounds. And so what you might do is combine it with something that's also gonna work on whatever indication. So, so for example, you might have, say a, a sleep compound combined with melatonin or something like that. Or you have a cancer med that's,
And then you have some say cannabinoid that that works on cancer. And so you pursue patent protection for the combination of your cannabinoid and this existing compound. That kind of thing. Can, can open up doors in terms of what you can cover with a patent. Um, but since you, you know, since you mentioned, uh, trade secrets, it's important to, I, I wanna touch on that real quick because, Trade secrets are another way to go.
Um, unlike a, unlike a patent, a patent has a term and it's 20 years from filing, and it ends up generally being 17 years after issuance. So once you actually have your patent 17 years, you can run the world on that in that area. Once that runs out, everyone's gonna make generics. And this is what happens with generic drugs and so on.
Um, that's when. [00:28:00] Now, let's say that, that something is already patented or you don't wanna patent for one another, what?
Um, and that has no term of course, because you can keep it locked up forever. But there are some important distinctions here. If you are interested in keeping your invention as a trade secret and never going the patent route, you can never start down the patent route. So you can't go file an application, get a bunch of rejections from the patent office and say, all right, actually, nevermind.
I'm gonna keep this as a trade secret and not a patent. Once you started the process of that kind of public disclosure, then you can't turn around. No judge will will protect secret after. And so this is the type of strategy consideration that, that you you wanna take. And, and so if you have a new compound, a new drug, I, I highly recommend getting a, a patent cover.
Now, different story if. Formulation, like even some of these solves and stuff like that, or, or a beverage for example. [00:29:00] I mean, I mean, Coca-Cola, the formula for Coca-Cola is like the best, most valuable trade secret out there. If you have something like that where, where you're not in the, the technical world necessarily of, of here's a new compound and exactly.
Everything's described, but you have some concoction. That people love and works well and you think is special, then you might be best off never pursuing a patent on that and keeping it as a trade secret. But if you wanna protect that down the line, you have to start from day one by making sure that you keep everybody under NDAs, whoever sees that formulation, you have to lock the formula up in a safe somewhere and be able to show you know that, that you are are paying for that.
That type of protection. Security, security, cybersecurity. From day one, uh, on, on a trade secret project, uh, somebody.
And so there's this element of what's [00:30:00] available in the public domain, right? That plays into everything. You're talking about protecting trade secrets and but also for patent applications and for the patent office, and for what are the general guidelines for where and when information could either support or negate somebody's pursuit of intellectual property.
Yeah. So I mean there, there's some important timelines here and, and the, the, the most common issue that's encountered in this realm is, is, uh, public disclosure. Okay. So let's say I'm a, I'm a cannabis company and I'm working with an academic at, say, some university, universities and academic laboratories are focused on.
Sharing the things that they learn with the public. And that's what you're gonna do with a patent. But it depends on when you do it. And so, so a lot of people will run up to the issue, but where they have a, an academic is excited about results that they have with, with some cannabinoid or psychedelic, and they wanna tell the world 'cause that's their job and they go and publish, uh, A paper [00:31:00] on, on this, that, that starts a clock.
Once an invention is publicly disclosed, either in a presentation or publication, any sort of publicly accessible, even a website describing this invention, that starts a one year clock, at which point you have to file a patent application. Or you're not gonna get, you're not gonna get one. And, and the, the, the spirit of that is that the patent office says, Hey, if you've invented something and told the world about it, you need to go ahead and pay us and get this prosecution done so that you can get your patent application.
And after a year runs out, they view it as that you weren't interested in pursuing a patent on that and, and you were barred. To Patentability. And so it's something people wanna think about when they're, when they're discussing their exciting new results with, with whatever, um, you know, cannabis or psychedelics, compounds they have.
Um, or working with academics to keep an eye on what public disclosures are happening, um, so that they can be aware of that. Now, once one does file an application, there are some key timelines. Uh, uh, there's something called a provisional application, which is sort of like [00:32:00] application. It, uh, puts you in line at the patent office for a specific type of invention, um, but uh, but isn't actually examined.
And so one can file provisional application and then you have a full year before you need to convert that to a real application, a utility or design application that's going to be examined. And so, um, there are some important timelines in. I feel you're working people who are talking about, you know, your, your science, then you need to.
Uh, make sure you keep control of those dates and, and there's a global, um, component to this too. Different countries have different rules and different, how should US-based companies think about, um, you know, what's happening in other countries? Yeah, no, that's, that's a great question. I mean, a lot of people I was thinking about.
Patents and they think about the US patent office, which is good. We, we, there's lots of money here. If you have an invention, you wanna sell it in [00:33:00] America. And so, so that's important. But especially when it comes to things like producing compounds. You know, if you're, if you're talking about making kilograms of something, it's likely that that is actually gonna happen.
If you get to a large enough scale in another country like India or China, I. Almost done are the, and so that means that you need to protect making that compound, for example, that compound in country be. That can be daunting. There's hundreds of com, uh, countries out there and they do have different laws.
And so, so there's, there's been a system set up to, to, um, streamline this. And it's by, uh, an organization called wipo, the World Intellectual Property Organization. And there's tons of member countries, almost all the countries in the world are members and, and those that aren't, you know, are, are, can be, you can pursue patents there as well.
But what you would do if you were interested in, in, in going big time with your, with your patents is, is, would be to file [00:34:00] in the country that you live in, which is for most people would be either, uh, America or Canada, maybe, or some European countries where people are doing this work, which is a member country of intellectual property, a world intellectual property organization.
And then what they will do is take your application and then enter it into what's called national.
I'm file application in. But that patent office will transfer everything to wipo, which will then give you some time and, and, and, uh, and then choices as to here are so member countries, which would you like to, to, uh, patent your invention in as well. And so basically that. One application will branch out into all of the individual countries that you choose to pursue protection in.
And then you'll be, uh, like you are with the patent office, having a back and forth with those individual countries. And so, so, um, prosecution gets, uh, becomes a lot larger scale as it moves on and moves into national [00:35:00] phase for, for something that you're pursuing worldwide protection on. So, interesting. We could certainly keep going, but I wanna end on a more philosophical point.
Here, Mike Sure is soup medicine. And I wanna go back to a conversation that you and I had that I think encapsulates a lot of the dynamic of, of what's happening, right? So what's exciting about these, this space and cannabis is, is new inventions, new discoveries, new treatments for. Consider viable treatments for a lot of unmet medical needs, and they're broad in scope.
And the, the applications could be transformative. I mean, there's, you mentioned Epidiolex, which is, uh, you know, a treatment for, uh, adolescent epilepsy. Um, and that's just, The first of what should be, you know, hundreds and hundreds of indications that this plant has the ability to, um, to provide, uh, some benefits to.
And so we were having the conversation about, you know, what occurs in nature versus what is, you know, processed or [00:36:00] synthesized, what you know is protectable and not, uh, and I mentioned to you, Mike, that you know, I. Uh, you know, an an ex and her mom used to make me this really good matza ball soup, this chicken noodle soup.
And I wasn't feeling well. And I have the soup and I feel a little bit better. I'm like, but is soup medicine? Right. And I think this is an interesting way to to to think about it in particular with a recreational market that is really the foundation of the cannabis industry, right? Is is this recreational market where you have something that in nature and you can consume it and has a certain right.
Everything in pharma originates in nature at some point, right? It's agus.
Now, the analogy I like to use is aspirin, right? Aspirin comes from Willow. You know, can I go chew on willow and have the same effects? Getting a's in quality manufacturing, and I think this is a question that. I don't know what the [00:37:00] answer is necessarily, but it's a conversation I think we need to be having more of in cannabis, which is, is cannabis medicine.
Right? So we talk about from a regulatory standpoint, there seems to be, there's the recreational and then the medicinal, right? Well, a lot of the times the medicinal component is just a consumption. Access for consumption that is still being used predominantly for intoxication effects, right? So when we think about what occurs in nature, and this question of is soup medicine, like where are we on the timeline of cannabis?
From your perspective, your opinion and and how does this layer into delivering healthcare versus access to everyone, everywhere. Yeah, I mean, it's a good, good question. Important point, and
in established. Western medicine world that, that we live in, which is, is, is a historical, uh, belief and, and or, or approach, which is that you've got one molecule to treat, one indication or disease. That's, that's, [00:38:00] that's what all of the regulatory system is set up to, to, to foster and that that is, Uh, sort of orchestrated by the pharmaceutical industry as time has rolled by, but also it's just a matter of simplicity.
If I wanna know that a compound safe worldwide, then you know, that's, that's why we clinical trials, When you're testing a, a medicine and that medicine is made up of more than one compound, you have complexities. You know, it's, it's like, it's the, the issue of like saying, I, I have two options for something and now I have, throw in another thing that's also two options.
Now I have two times, two options, and so, The more compounds that you're looking to test, uh, on humans in particular, uh, the more sticky the, the analysis of that gets. And, and so just because of the way that, that the, the regulatory system is set up, it, it heavily favors single molecule therapeutics. And now we're just finally entering the.
[00:39:00] Things that are made up of two or three compounds can actually become real medicines that you can, you can get access. Cannabis is the total. Uh, potentially medicinally active compounds in, in a, in a cannabis plant sample, a cannabis flower. And so that's just way too much to sort out. You never know that even one of those trace amounts and, and, and every flower on, on, on even a plant has different amounts.
If you were to, to go ahead and spectroscopically and analyze, you know, just different buds from the.
First of all, yes, soup is medicine, food is medicine, water is medicine. Um, and, and so, but, but that, uh, uh, line of thinking is, is not, um, is not a play well with today's regulatory system. And that's something that we need to fix. And I think that, that, that cannabis is the perfect. Vehicle from which to do that because everyone knows cannabis has tons of benefits.
The cat is outta the bag for people who didn't already know it. Um, but, [00:40:00] but cannabis is full-blown medicine for tons of other stuff, but for me or anyone to be able to distribute that, um, it's not gonna, it's not gonna be a cannabis plant. You, you're not gonna ask, uh, an Alzheimer's patient to, to do vong rips.
I mean, maybe some of them will the cool ones. Um, but, uh, uh, uh, but you know, you, you, at a certain point you have to be able to give people a pill that's a precise dose. Um, and, and that, that requires taking everything apart. You have to take everything apart and know exactly what's in there. Exactly how much.
So, so that you can do reproducible studies and then actually arrive at something that, that at least the government says is safe so that you can sell it. Well, Mike, that's a great, great answer and a conversation. We're gonna have to come back and visit in round two or more. Um, but I think that's a great place to, to, to leave today to think about, you know, precision medicine, the rigor with which, the scientific rigor with which.
Is just required in order to truly [00:41:00] understand what's what's happening. And it certainly speaks to me to a clear definition between developing between recreational medicinal medical markets and, and that, you know, this is a new technology that the pharmaceutical, you know, model will. Play well with, and it's an exciting time to be looking at this stuff.
It's complicated. It's not for the faint of heart, but luckily there's folks like you out there that, that are believers and passionate and have years and years of, of, of experience and, and skills in order to, you know, participate. So Mike, thank you very much for joining us. Um, I. Regretfully didn't get a plug in for my book yet, and you already have a copy of it, so I can't even offer, but, um, I, oh wait, was that a shameless plug right there?
Was it, oh, I mean, the podcast is called Cannabis Capital. Um, if you're out there listening, you haven't got a book yet, um, email me or buy it on Amazon. Um, Mike, [00:42:00] real pleasure talking with you. Thank you so much for being here and I look forward to, um, having more of these conversations. Thanks for having me, Ross.