In some respects, attempts to "improve" on "natural" life forms have been made for as long as humans have existed. Breeders have utilized the techniques of selection, separation, and crossing to create a bewildering array of forms for a variety of domesticated organisms, from pigeons to dogs to cattle. In the 19th and 20th centuries, breeders came to be a more central part of biological science, producing both important knowledge and new forms of life. Darwin was moved by the results of breeders and this became the basis for the opening chapter of his seminal On the Origin of Species. In the early 20th century, Luther Burbank became known as "the Edison of the plant world" for the large number of new varieties and species he created and attempted to commercially package. The ownership of each new form came to be an issue during the 20th century. This came to be especially important as the new science of genetics came to be applied to practical breeding, giving rise to many new forms. Thus, the issue of ownership of like is an enduring one--it has been an issue of controversy for over 70 years.

Two forces have recently made this issue of even more central importance to society. First, the pace of technological development has greatly accelerated with the genetic revolution. Celera (a private company) recently announced that they have sequenced the human genome (far more rapidly than previously thought possible) and will produce vast amounts of sequence data on other organisms as well. This will lead to the discovery of more and more "genes" and the elucidation of some of their functions. The announcement that it was possible to clone an animal (Dolly the sheep) using the nucleus of an adult cell is one of the more vivid examples of the transformations that are taking place. Genetic engineering has allowed creation of bacteria which can perform useful functions (such as metabolizing oil from a spill). The patenting of the Charkobarty bacteria opened the door for the patenting of a host of new engineered organisms--from insect resistant plants, to cows whose milk contain drugs which are useful to humans.

At the same time, a second force accentuated the importance of this issue. Legislative and policy developments in the 1980's have helped to encourage the practice of patenting scientific research (even when done with public funds). These laws and policies are predicated on the idea that the traditional concept of "ownership" has an important role to play in promoting the technological revolution. The Bayh-Dole act and the Stephenson-Wyler act (both passed in 1980) helped encourage the patenting of useful inventions or discoveries with the aim of promoting the practical development of products emerging out of scientific research.

This has lead to (among other things) an incredible array of patent applications for the discovery of genes--ranging from patents on associations between alleles and diseases, to CDNA and EST's for both human and non-human genes. Legal challenges of many of the patents are pending and there is a growing sense of urgency around issues of both gene patenting and engineered forms of life.

These controversies to some extent mirror deeper concerns about the development of these technologies at all. As a result, the "ownership of life" has become one of the most central set of issues facing the new technologies, and may lead us to a host of difficult questions: what is life? what is natural? do we want to promote the commercial development of these technologies (and when)? are we somehow "commodifying" life by our practices?

Thanks to a generous grant from the Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation, the Center for Bioethics produced a conference and a forthcoming volume to be entitled "Who Owns Life?" This web site is a result of their generous support along with the support of the Kenneth Scott Charitable Trust. We hope this site helps stimulate discussion, and we especially encourage teachers to contact us with any questions about the assignments or any of the material to be found here. For more information, contact David Magnus, PhD at magnus@mail.med.upenn.edu