IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jiplap/v21y2026i2p114-120..html

Should we patent the ‘Woolly Mammoth’? Ecological and animal welfare objections

Author

Listed:
  • David M Doyle
  • Natallia Hlushchenko
  • Shane McCorristine
  • Kevin Healy

Abstract

Over the last few years, there have been claims that de-extinction practitioners will recreate the ‘Woolly Mammoth’ (Mammuthus primigenius)—or at least something that resembles it—by 2027. Given the recent births of the ‘Colossal Woolly Mouse’—mice engineered to express multiple key mammoth-like traits that provide adaptations to life in cold climates—and the ‘Dire Wolf’—genetically modified grey wolves— it appears that Colossal Biosciences’ goal of bringing back a mammoth is now becoming a realistic prospect.Building on previous work that explores whether de-extinct species would qualify as patent-eligible subject matter under European and United States (US) patent law, this article critically assesses the potential ethical implications of patenting a woolly mammoth created via genetic engineering under European Patent Law, and highlights some of the ecological and animal welfare objections that are likely to be raised.We argue that such ethical considerations are likely to be similar to those raised against transgenic animals in the past, and thus unlikely to be significant hurdles to patenting a de-extinct woolly mammoth under European Patent Law.

Suggested Citation

  • David M Doyle & Natallia Hlushchenko & Shane McCorristine & Kevin Healy, 2026. "Should we patent the ‘Woolly Mammoth’? Ecological and animal welfare objections," Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 114-120.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jiplap:v:21:y:2026:i:2:p:114-120.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jiplp/jpaf077
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jiplap:v:21:y:2026:i:2:p:114-120.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jiplp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.