Summary: Mr. McGovern discusses the reasoning behind the leap from patentability of non-living things to the living things within the last twenty years. He concludes that neither the Supreme Court or Court of Customs and Patent Appeals has offered a convincing rationale for the inclusion of living things within 35 U.S.C. Section 101.
Summary: The law regarding animals can also affect those who own, use, or enjoy them. In recent years, the equine industry has become more vulnerable to liability as a result of recent court decisions undermining the traditional view that persons who participate in horseback riding assume the risk of injuries they incur. This paper examines six significant cases, as well as statutes passed by state legislatures to meet the challenges posed by these decisions. The legislative history and debate over the passage of a Connecticut bill are examined to illustrate the policy behind equine liability acts.
Summary: Mr. Duckler examines the historical perceptions of zoo animals as legal entities and discusses a proposal to classify zoo animals as objects for historical preservation, suggesting that zoo animals and society will be better served by a change in the historical legal status of zoos and zoo animals.
Summary: Approximately thirty-five million dollars are spent each year by the Animal Damage Control division of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to destroy predator animals that supposedly kill livestock. The methods by which the ADC kills these âpredatorsâ are appalling. Mr. Hoch argues that funding for this program is excessive, irresponsible, and raises serious ethical questions. He concludes that ADC activities should be terminated immediately.
Summary: Ms. Hessler examines the constitutionality of the federal hunter harassment statute and concludes that protests of hunting events should be protected under the First Amendment.
Summary: The 104th Congress legislated a complete moratorium on the listing of species and critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act. Mr. Kopf explores the motivations behind the moratorium and hows how market forces may further weaken the ESA. This article questions whether the moratorium and its subsequent repeal signal a new era of environmental awareness or a return to industryâs discreet manipulation of the legislative process.
Summary: Mr. Francione examines the philosophies of Peter Singer and Tom Regan and concludes, in part, that there is nothing in rights theory that necessarily precludes the animal advocate from pursuing incremental legislative or judicial change; however, he asserts that we cannot speak meaningfully of legal rights for animals as long as animals are regarded as property.
Summary: A presentation to the Senior Lawyers division of the American Bar Association in Orlando, Florida on August 2, 1996.
Summary: A pragmatist can be thought of as someone concerned about the practical consequences of her actions or beliefs. It is likely that all animal rights activists, whose common goal might be framed as the eradication of animal oppression, consider themselves pragmatists. Theirs is a lofty goal. Oppression which has been thousands of years in the making could reasonably be anticipated to be a long time in the unmaking. In the intervening years, different ideas have emerged about the practical consequences of different actions or beliefs. These differences (sometimes categorized under the broad headings of'rights" or 'welfare'" have transformed, or been transformed, into a pernicious conflict between advocates. It is essential, if meaningful change is to be achieved, that this conflict be resolved and not casually remanded to the realm where all opinions are seen to be equally valid, and to each her own. Gary Francione, lawyer, professor and author, has recently attempted an analysis of this discord in his book Rain Without Thunder: The Ideology of the Animal Rights Movement. The following commentary briefly considers some of the observations and conclusions Francione makes and some of the backlash his thoughts have engendered.
Summary: "In Rain Without Thunder Gary Francione makes a number of very interesting and original points. Space will not permit a full discussion of all these points, but I would like to mention at least two points regarding his after-the-fact analysis of PETA's campaigns and the danger of using -other types of exploitation, such as sexism, to further the animal rights movement I will then discuss in more detail a third point involving a distinction Francione makes that clarifies a number of problems and has great significance for the animal rights movement."
