The patenting of the onco-mouse, a genetically engineered mouse developed by Harvard University in the 1980s for cancer research, raised a wide range of legal, ethical, economic, and social issues within the framework of intellectual property rights management. The onco-mouse was designed to carry a gene that made it highly susceptible to cancer, thereby serving as a valuable tool for studying tumor development and testing treatments. While it represented a breakthrough in biotechnology, its patenting sparked global debates about the limits and implications of granting proprietary rights over living organisms. One of the central issues concerns the ethical implications of patenting life forms. The onco-mouse is not a mechanical invention but a living being capable of suffering, reproduction, and biological processes. Critics argue that granting patents over such organisms commodifies life and reduces living entities to mere objects of ownership and commercial exploitation. This raises moral questions about whether humans have the right to claim ownership over genetically modified animals and whether such ownership undermines respect for life and biodiversity. Closely related is the issue of animal welfare. The onco-mouse is intentionally engineered to develop cancer, which inherently involves pain and suffering. The patent system, by granting exclusive rights to create and use such animals, may indirectly promote practices that cause harm to animals in the name of scientific progress.