Slashdot Mirror
US Horse Registry Forced To Accept Cloned Horses
kdryer39 writes "U.S. District Court Judge Mary Lou Robinson said she will sign an order requiring the American Quarter Horse Association to begin allowing cloned animals to be placed on its registry, according to the organization. A jury last month ruled that the horse association violated anti-monopoly laws by banning cloned animals. The quarter horse association issues and maintains a pedigree registry of American quarter horses, a popular breed associated with cowboys riding on the range in the 19th and early 20th centuries."
Hamburger filler, corn starch, mono-sodium glutimate, red dye # 7,...
Just read the label, dude.
Beta sux! Join the Slashcott! http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4760465&cid=46173047
I don't see it. Horse breeding is not Horse cloning. Bad idea. Very bad. I can't even fathom the idea that they can force them to take cloned animals.
What I'd like to know is how are they creating a monopoly by banning cloned horses from being accepted in there registry?
I don't see it. Horse breeding is not Horse cloning. Bad idea. Very bad. I can't even fathom the idea that they can force them to take cloned animals.
The point of getting them registered is to allow them to breed, and their offspring to be on the registry, and to race. You don't necessarily have to race the clones for registration to be worthwhile, and given the premature senescence of clones such as Dolly, they likely are not very good for racing in any case.
Forget this common, everyday cloning stuff... Come back to me when they invent the nanotech to restore the other three-quarters of the horse.
If this registry were Microsoft, I wonder how the tone of the comments would change. Apparently, they have a monopoly on the registry. That opens them up for regulation. The cloned horses are legal, but their owners can't register them without creating a whole new register and trying to compete, which is too steep a hurdle because... it's a monopoly. So. As long as the registry is allowed to mark the horses as clones, I don't see a problem with this ruling. That way, the clone owners get to register their animals, and people who don't want clones in a bloodline can look it up and exclude it.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
It's a quarter horse? What are the other 3/4?
It's a metric hating faster horse, designed to run a quarter mile faster than other type of horses.
Yesterday's Weirdness is Tomorrow's Reason Why
WTF do they have a monopoly on? A list?
If the Boy Scouts can keep gays out since they're a private organization, someone should be able to make a horse list according to their criteria.
a better question is, why do so many gays (and others) want so very badly to be in a place where they are so clearly not wanted and appreciated? reminds me of shannon faulkner suing to get into VMI (and dropping out soon after btw). why would you sue to get into someplace instead of finding a place where you are wanted and appreciated? course VMI accepted public money so faulkner won that suit. but really i just don't understand this desire.
another question: we would not allow a straight man to sleep in a tent in close proximity to young girls who are not his offspring because he might be a sick fuck. he probably isnt but it is not something to take chances with. you just dont see this being done anywhere. why should we allow gay men to sleep in tents in close proximity to young boys who are not their offspring? treating gays as equals would mean not allowing either scenario.
but really boy scouts are dominated by christians and others who generally follow traditional judaeo-christian morality. christianity and the bible is very clear about how they feel about gays. gay men suing to try to get into boy scouts is a lot like a ham company suing to get into a mosque or synagogue, it just doesn't make sense.
The problem is not greed. The problem is government dictating how people should run their lives.
Greed for money or goods is a material form of avarice. The lust to have and perpetually expand power at every opportunity is just a non-material form of greed. The latter is more dangerous by far because it is backed by the police power of government and there is no counter-force causing it to retreat. There is only incremental advancement.
This isn't a road or an essential utility or a national security issue. There is no real public interest here. Ergo, the correct solution would have been to dismiss the suit and tell the plaintiffs that they are free to form their own clone registry. The fact that the current registry is a monopoly would be immaterial because said monopoly excludes clones and thus wouldn't compete with a clone registry. The clone registry would probably find itself entirely without competition. Then those who are interested in cloned horses know where to look while those wanting horses bred the old-fashioned way also know where to look.
Apparently that's just not as fun as forcing people to do what they explicitly don't want to do.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
The copy will always suffer genome degradation over the span of many generations.
Tell that to bacteria. Heck, your individual cells. No real limit.
Say, WHAT?
It occasionally goes wrong, but a bit of testing could easily keep that under control.
You sound like most of the managers I met: their wording always used a bit and easily when it comes to testing and QA.
(not to mention the display of varying amount of ignorance about the actual process they are suppose to support and control).
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
I'm with the Quarter Horse Association on this one. They're not the government. They have no "fairness" obligation to everyone. I don't see how they can be accused of holding a monopoly when "no other horse breeding registry allows cloned animals ..." indicates that they ain't the only game in town. Start your own damned registry if you don't like the current offerings. If the incumbents run you out of Dodge on a rail, then you have an actionable claim based on anti-competitive business practices. But I don't see how you can claim "monopoly" simply because you don't like a private organization's rules.
Hey, I just started the "No Clones Alllowed Horse Registry." Can these two horse breeders sue me and force my no-clones registry to accept their cloned animals?
Salient facts from TFA :-
What is more compelling is the statement from AQHA after the verdict :-
Seriously, now. If you don't like the rules of a voluntary association, work from within to change the rules. Or talk to them, negotiate to get them to accept you. Or leave, and form your own association with the rules you like. Going to court to force others to put up with you is so wrong.
And yes, I dont't see where is the monopoly. The plaintiffs can still whatever they want with their cloned horses, breed them, sell them, race them etc. They just can't be registered with the AQHA.
If you want to argue that horses are people, I'll agree with you, but you've got a hard row to hoe. In the meantime, this is basically equivalent to saying that NASCAR can't ban vehicles based on their characteristics.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Imagine if a quarter horse was cloned and became a hot breeding item. By restricting the registry to the master copy only, there would be only one source of "official" sperm, thus a monopoly.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
a better question is, why do so many gays (and others) want so very badly to be in a place where they are so clearly not wanted and appreciated?
It could be due to the fact that they were Scouts when they were younger and want to carry on the tradition. In many areas the Boy Scouts are the only organization that offers outdoor activities. Many gay fathers would like to be a Scout Master in the troops of their children.
we would not allow a straight man to sleep in a tent in close proximity to young girls who are not his offspring because he might be a sick fuck
At coed camps adults of the opposite gender sleep near children all the time. There are female Scout Masters who are allowed to sleep in a tent in close proximity to boys; why not gay men? You are also incorrect as the Girl scouts allow male volunteers.
Q: Who can volunteer?
A: Membership is open to women and men 18 and over who accept the Girl Scout Promise and Law.
So, as I understand it, a cloned horse is where you take the DNA from a horse and put it into a donor egg to fertilize it with a complete chromosomal genome. Right, so, as we all know, the cell has other genetic material (mitochondrial DNA, for example). So, it's a fact that the initial cloned animal cell does not have ALL the same DNA that the initial fertilized egg had. If only the clone's chromosomal DNA is the same as the donor, then the cloned animal fertilized with nuclear DNA is not completely identical to the parent, and the clone WILL NOT produce the exact same genetic lineage that the host did -- Unless in the case of a female cloned via its own eggs? Registering studs means they of course do not produce their own eggs for cloning...
Mitochondria are key to the ATP energy cycle of cells; Thus the cloned animal and its offspring may not perform the same athletically as the parent.
In other words: It means that the Cloned Horses should be marked as such in the registry, and the Mother cell donor should be listed -- It's a whole other connectivity graph whereby instead of mixing the nucleic genomes, we are preserving the nucleic genome of the father and mixing it with the non-nucleic genome provided by the egg donor...
And you thought re-engineering a database to allow more sexes than just M or F was a pain? Yeah, I can see why the other registries would put off accepting clones.
Note: I work with artificial cybernetic genomes. I'm not a geneticist, but I felt this needed to be stated since I didn't see such posted above.
Today's cloning is not like calling Object.clone(); It's more like overriding most of the inherited object's methods having to do with appearance and structure, etc. but not all of them. Oh fine, it's like copying a complete car, but modifying the fuel injectors... Normal folks won't care but if you're racing them it might make a big difference.
Please do correct me if I'm wrong.
Cloned animals should not be allowed back in to the general population until either the scientific method is fixed and perfected
The scientific method works just fine, why, thank you, and it has nothing to do with the minutiae of applied zootechnics, even if it happens in a lab.
Ezekiel 23:20
I'm not gay, but I'm not welcome in the Boy Scouts for odious discriminatory reasons. So why do I hang around?
May I ask why? Feel free to give a list of other discrimination they practice if you'd rather not be specific, as I ask so I can be better informed, rather than trying to poke my nose into your personal life.
I'm not the GP, but one possibility is that the poster is an avowed atheist. Though there is no particularly mandated religion in Boy Scouts (e.g. Hindus are welcome), atheism is not allowed.
The poster could also be a Quaker, as Boy Scouts have a Scout Oath that must be repeated and Quakers adhere to the biblical command from Jesus not to swear oaths.
These are just off the top of my head, so there may be others.
It's not a monopoly if the item is scarce. What if I built an exact replica of a vintage Bugatti and then insist on having it registered as an official Bugatti? What if I built a hackintosh and insist on apple putting a serial number and a logo on it? The proper answer is "No, f*ck you!".
Do the official registry prevent the creation of a cloned animals registry? Let the damn market choose which registry to consider.
In freedom, one could create the registry of ogm free stuff, male-only (or female-only, or white-only) clubs, and so on. As long as I don't hurt anybody, directly or with negative propaganda, nobody has any business interfering.
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
The problem usually comes not because of the registry, but because there may be other organizations which only "recognize" horses from that registry for their purposes. For example, if a race organization requires that a horse be "pure bred", and only accepts AQHA pedigree, then things start getting messy. And very likely, AQHA rules don't allow AQHA-registered horses to breed out-of-registry, which massively restricts the breeding pool for any competing registry.
In other words, sometimes these sorts of registries act as gatekeepers for a whole host of things, and it makes more sense to change the registry than the change the practices of everything "downstream". Particularly if the registry isn't keeping up with industry practices, or the rules start to introduce health issues with pedigree animals (i.e. reduces the breeding pool excessively).
Log in or piss off.
I don't see it. Horse breeding is not Horse cloning. Bad idea. Very bad. I can't even fathom the idea that they can force them to take cloned animals.
It's very simple:
The US has a great many companies involved in genetically modifying or cloning stuff. These companies donate substantial sums to the political parties that judges are appointed by. Any judge who allowed these companies to be put at any sort of commercial inconvenience would find themselves very unpopular with the people who ultimately have a large say in them getting a promotion.
Some judges might hold firm on matters of principle safe in the knowledge that they cannot be easily removed from office but that may well remove any chance of them making it to the supreme court.
I dont read
My Formula 1 Race car appreciates this new rule change
Screw that, I am entering a tank. Lets see how many laps you manage before you get crushed.
I dont read
If you had ten clones of a proven track horse you could increase your winnings by driving the horse harder, at the risk of damaging them because you have backup copies. For the welfare of the animals, this should be banned from horse racing... or any other sport that involves animals being commanded by people.
It's not a monopoly if the item is scarce.
What? You're nuts. Completely nuts. That has nothing to do with anything. It's a monopoly if you are the sole source. The whole point of a patent or a trademark is to grant a monopoly for the purpose of creating artificial scarcity! And that's precisely what the situation is here; anyone with the technology could theoretically clone one of these horses from something they found in a turd.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The problem usually comes not because of the registry, but because there may be other organizations which only "recognize" horses from that registry for their purposes.
Great. File a suit against those organizations, seeking to force them to recognize horses from other registries. That makes sense. Forcing a registry for bred horses to accept cloned horses is unacceptable.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
It's a good thing he didn't post that in reply to you, but to the same post you replied to. Congratulations on your utter lack of threaded discussion system comprehension.
Whoops! You're right. I take it all back. I guess I failed to click "parent". I will wear the ass hat today.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
You wouldn't clone a common Quarter Horse. You would clone an exceptionally valuable Quarter Horse. Some of them are worth millions of dollars.
Actually, they allow it- you just can't register the foal in the AQHA registry at that point.
You'll see part-bred Arabians all the time and the AHA allows them to be registered as Partbred-Arabians in a seperate segment of the whole registry.
Why would you want to do this? Simple. You very often get the best of both worlds when you do it. It's just not a breed unto itself and won't "breed true".
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Gay doesn't equate to pedophile. Say that again: Gay doesn't imply Pedophile.
So, back to the parents question regarding allowing straight males to sleep in tents with young females, then the same rule should apply. But it doesn't.
Just another day in Paradise