I’m done with this conversation now because you’re being willfully ignorant (as expected). One quote talking about characteristics is out of context for this discussion. There is a wealth of other context here that you are intentionally ignoring, specifically the many parts showing that scientists do not all agree with a reductionist definition only considering gametes. Your claim that no other definition makes sense is absolute bullshit in the scientific community and you should be ashamed for pretending it’s the only definition out there.















Legally, it seems it does, at least in the US and EU. I assume China too.
Whether or not it should is a different argument, but copyright is a legal framework, not an ethical one.