Why some researchers oppose unrestricted sharing of coronavirus genome data

These developing world labs and researchers are far more reliant on being included in published research output and receiving research funding than their developed world counterparts.

For them, releasing their data into a shared pool as effectively anonymous contributions means there is zero incentive for developed world researchers, who have the resources to exploit the large data sets, to partner with those who provided the sequences.

In other words, for developed world researchers the sequencing of samples is easier, cheaper, and something they can do in addition to all their other research usually by pawning the work off to interns. For developing world researchers the sequencing work is far costlier, more difficult, and takes up more of the primary researcher's time. By treating both as though they were the same you're potentially making the developing world sequencing work financially non-viable.

The risk, then, is that those labs stop being able to provide a useful and ongoing set of sequences, rendering us effectively blind in terms of genomic surveillance in those countries and regions. Clearly that's not ideal.

I don't believe the answer is to not have an open data approach, though. The benefits of being able to mine large genome sets is self-evident, and may help with new vaccines and treatments. But it may be worth finding a hybrid solution that works, perhaps by arrangement some sort of payment for the labs and researchers who agree to add their sequences to the open data set.