Re: Old Topic - Glowing Zebra Danios

"RedForeman ©®" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Now in Red...
>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/031202/480/ny11412021855

I'm glad someone started a new thread about them. I'll put aside for
the time my objections to these fish, in favor of asking about this,
from the Segrest FAQ:

"Why are GloFish™ the only fluorescent fish that can be sold in the
United States?"

"Because fluorescent fish are unique, their sale is covered by a
substantial number of patents and pending patent applications. The
providers of GloFish™ fluorescent fish are the only distributors that
have the necessary licenses to produce and market fluorescent fish
within the United States. The production of these fish by any other
party, or the sale of fluorescent fish not originally distributed by
the authorized providers, is strictly prohibited."


This doesn't seem quite right to me. Certainly Segrest and the related
companies hold the patent to *this* particular fluorescent fish, but
the way this statement reads, some other company that came up with,
say, fluorescing blue plecos, couldn't market them. Offhand, that
sounds like utter BS to me.

Also, can these fish breed? I couldn't find any official statement
about it, just conflicting second and third hand comments that yes,
they can breed, and no, they are sterile. Does anyone have a link to
an official answer?

And assuming the official stance is "they are sterile", I have to ask
"Wanna bet?" One little slip by the QA department (and it will happen)
and someone will breed them. Once individuals are breeding them in
their own home tanks, does Segrest think it'll actually be able to
stop hobbyists from selling their excess stock?

I see another court case coming about if someone can actually lay
intellectual property claim to a species, especially if there proves
to be a profitable market in GM pets.

--
www.ericschreiber.com