The Business Ethics Blog

This one would make a terrific case-study for anyone teaching business ethics.

CBC ran a story back in February on the few Canadian stores then selling GloFish™. In case you haven’t heard of it, the GloFish™ is a small tropical fish (a zebra fish, to be exact) that has been genetically modified so that it glows in the dark. They were developed (and are now legally sold) in the U.S.

Apparently, the fish were imported into Canada in violation of federal regulations. According to the CBC’s story, the retail outlets they talked to had no idea that there was a problem.

Lesson #1: Monsanto isn’t the only firm we can talk about when discussing commerce in Genetically Modified Organisms. These issues, and a range of new demands, are facing a huge range of companies both very large and very small. See relevant comments here from an executive with the Federation of American Aquarium Societies.

Here’s the Advisory Note issued by Environment Canada back in February.

(On a related note: here’s a good commentary on current controversy over cloning pets.)

Issues here:
What is the responsibility of companies with regard to keeping up to date on environmental policies in general? Does genetic science change the rules in this regard?
One small-time fish breeder was unaware that he was breeding GloFish™ (purchased at a pet store) in violation of patent. Whose responsibility is it to get such industries “up to speed?”
More generally: Biotechnology has introduced *new* concerns into various commercial domains that previously faced few ethical issues. When is it problematic for a firm to assume that a tropical fish is just a tropical fish?