Activists from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) recently tried to disrupt&nbsp;Victoria Beckham's fashion show during Paris Fashion Week. The demonstrators took to the runway during&nbsp;the event and joined Beckham's models to highlight their&nbsp;T-shirts, adorned with the message "Animals aren't fabric". They were also holding signs that read "Viva vegan leather."

While Beckham's fashion brand has a policy against using fur or exotic skins, PETA's protest targeted her use of leather in her designs.

Mimi Bekhechi, PETA's European president, was quoted by the BBC saying, "No garment or accessory is worth violently slaughtering and skinning a sensitive and intelligent animal. We are urging Victoria Beckham to turn instead to the ethical and eco-friendly innovations available today, such as high-end leather made from apples, grapes, pineapples, mushrooms, and more."

Despite the disruption, Beckham appeared unfazed, closing the show with a confident stride despite using crutches and wearing a black protective boot on her left foot due to an injury sustained at the gym.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/hailey-biebers-sister-gets-arrested-after-bar-fight-charged-with-battery-and-criminal-trespassing-695875">Hailey Bieber’s sister gets arrested after bar fight; charged with battery and criminal trespassing</a>

She was supported at the event by her family, including her husband David Beckham, who was recently the subject of a Netflix documentary, and former Brazilian international footballer Ronaldo, who played alongside David Beckham at Real Madrid.

PETA's protest at Beckham's show is part of a series of demonstrations they have staged this fashion season, with previous protests taking place in New York, London, and Milan. The activists aim to raise awareness about animal cruelty in the fashion industry and advocate for more sustainable and cruelty-free alternatives.

Activists from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) recently tried to disrupt Victoria Beckham's fashion show during Paris Fashion Week. The demonstrators took to the runway during the event and joined Beckham's models to highlight their T-shirts, adorned with the message "Animals aren't fabric".

Activists from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) recently tried to disrupt Victoria Beckham's fashion show during Paris Fashion Week. The demonstrators took to the runway during the event and joined Beckham's models to highlight their T-shirts, adorned with the message "Animals aren't fabric". They were also holding signs that read "Viva vegan leather." While Beckham's fashion brand has a policy against using fur or exotic skins, PETA's protest targeted her use of leather in her designs. Mimi Bekhechi, PETA's European president, was quoted by the BBC saying, "No garment or accessory is worth violently slaughtering and skinning a sensitive and intelligent animal. We are urging Victoria Beckham to turn instead to the ethical and eco-friendly innovations available today, such as high-end leather made from apples, grapes, pineapples, mushrooms, and more." Despite the disruption, Beckham appeared unfazed, closing the show with a confident stride despite using crutches and wearing a black protective boot on her left foot due to an injury sustained at the gym. Also read: Hailey Bieber’s sister gets arrested after bar fight; charged with battery and criminal trespassing She was supported at the event by her family, including her husband David Beckham, who was recently the subject of a Netflix documentary, and former Brazilian international footballer Ronaldo, who played alongside David Beckham at Real Madrid. PETA's protest at Beckham's show is part of a series of demonstrations they have staged this fashion season, with previous protests taking place in New York, London, and Milan. The activists aim to raise awareness about animal cruelty in the fashion industry and advocate for more sustainable and cruelty-free alternatives.

PETA activists storms Victoria Beckham’s Paris Fashion Week show

As millions of mink are culled in Europe amid fears they could spread the novel coronavirus, struggling Chinese suppliers are defying calls for their business to be banned and taking advantage of a surge in global prices for the prized fur.

Chinese mink farmers, rattled by a ban on wildlife trade early in the pandemic, are now resuming breeding of the slinky mammals, while traders have boosted prices by as much as a third as supplies tighten.

Authorities in Denmark, the world's biggest mink exporter, began slaughtering an estimated 15-17 million animals in early November after some tested positive for a mutated form of the coronavirus, raising concerns that vaccine-resistant strains could recirculate in humans.&nbsp;

The world’s largest fur auction house, Kopenhagen Fur, has announced that it will close by 2023 because of the cull.

Before the culls,&nbsp;China&nbsp;was the second-biggest producer of mink fur behind Denmark. However,&nbsp;experts believe their pelts won’t match the quality of those Denmark produced.

Beijing has shown a zero-tolerance approach to new infection risks, tracking imported frozen meat and seafood, and locking down communities whenever new transmissions occur. But it has taken little action against its mink farms, which researchers say number around 8,000 and hold about 5 million animals.

In the village of Shangcun around 180km (110 miles) south of Beijing, fur traders said their business was safe and would thrive as producers sought replacement pelts for coats costing $10,000 or more each.

"I don't worry about getting the virus from mink fur because I'm sure the Chinese government will do all the necessary checks," said Wang Zhanhui, a shop owner, running his hand over a strip of glossy black fur.

Animal welfare groups around the world have urged a ban on fur farming, saying the COVID-19 pandemic proves intensive captive breeding is not only cruel but also hazardous to human health.

"When it comes to public health risks, these farms and markets are much like the live animal market in Wuhan where the novel coronavirus is widely believed to have originated," said Jason Baker, Senior Vice President at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).

"Filthy fur farms are packed with sick, stressed, and injured animals and are breeding grounds for disease."

Studies also suggest mink are particularly prone to coronavirus infection and could transmit the virus back into humans.

"If the objective is to reduce transmission, then yes, having these mink farms is a big risk because it makes it much more difficult to manage the epidemic and creates such big reservoirs of susceptible hosts," said Francois Balloux, a geneticist with University College London and co-author of a recent paper on COVID-19 transmission in minks.

But while authorities have stepped up checks and offered free coronavirus tests at some bigger breeding facilities, Beijing is seen unlikely to crack down on an industry that earns an estimated $50 billion per year in&nbsp;China&nbsp;alone.

Prices rising

Chinese mink suppliers and traders who had been struggling in recent years due to declining overseas demand are already benefiting from rising prices.

"It felt great," said Wang He, a Shangcun trader and breeder, whose earnings increased 30-50 per cent&nbsp;when the price of mink fur jumped after Denmark ordered the cull.

Chinese demand has remained strong, with rising wealth and little in the way of animal rights activism.

But the coronavirus outbreak triggered a blanket ban on all wildlife trading in&nbsp;China, forcing some smaller breeders out of business and causing "panic", according to an industry association.

In April, the government said mink, arctic fox, and raccoon would be classified as "special livestock" rather than wildlife, and would therefore be exempt from the ban.

There are now signs the market is responding to the culls in Denmark, which was responsible for about 40 per cent&nbsp;of worldwide output.

Many Chinese farmers were considering abandoning the business altogether, said Zhao Yangang, another mink trader.

"They were preparing to stop rearing but now the markets started to move like this they've started breeding again," he said.

Inspections

China&nbsp;is well-aware of the health risks of intensive mink farming, known to be a source of infectious diseases like rabies and distemper. Most larger breeding facilities are subject to rigorous vaccination and hygiene regimes.

Wang the fur trader and breeder, said after the Danish cull was announced,&nbsp;China&nbsp;began administering free COVID-19 tests for captive minks.

"They came to my farm in Dalian and tested minks from five spots in the farm," he said.

But a wider crackdown is not expected as fur farming has been a relatively cheap way for local governments to alleviate poverty in rural communities and rustbelt regions such as Hebei, where it provides earning opportunities for laid-off industrial workers.

Still, experts say the health risks posed by minks cannot be separated from the conditions in which animals are kept.

"Minks are susceptible but we should not forget the conditions they are housed in," said Balloux.

"There are very large populations in cages, living on top of one another, and the numbers are insane."

&nbsp;

As millions of mink are culled in Europe amid fears they could spread the novel coronavirus, struggling Chinese suppliers are defying calls for their business to be banned and taking advantage of a surge in global prices for the prized fur.

As millions of mink are culled in Europe amid fears they could spread the novel coronavirus, struggling Chinese suppliers are defying calls for their business to be banned and taking advantage of a surge in global prices for the prized fur. Chinese mink farmers, rattled by a ban on wildlife trade early in the pandemic, are now resuming breeding of the slinky mammals, while traders have boosted prices by as much as a third as supplies tighten. Authorities in Denmark, the world's biggest mink exporter, began slaughtering an estimated 15-17 million animals in early November after some tested positive for a mutated form of the coronavirus, raising concerns that vaccine-resistant strains could recirculate in humans. The world’s largest fur auction house, Kopenhagen Fur, has announced that it will close by 2023 because of the cull. Before the culls, China was the second-biggest producer of mink fur behind Denmark. However, experts believe their pelts won’t match the quality of those Denmark produced. Beijing has shown a zero-tolerance approach to new infection risks, tracking imported frozen meat and seafood, and locking down communities whenever new transmissions occur. But it has taken little action against its mink farms, which researchers say number around 8,000 and hold about 5 million animals. In the village of Shangcun around 180km (110 miles) south of Beijing, fur traders said their business was safe and would thrive as producers sought replacement pelts for coats costing $10,000 or more each. "I don't worry about getting the virus from mink fur because I'm sure the Chinese government will do all the necessary checks," said Wang Zhanhui, a shop owner, running his hand over a strip of glossy black fur. Animal welfare groups around the world have urged a ban on fur farming, saying the COVID-19 pandemic proves intensive captive breeding is not only cruel but also hazardous to human health. "When it comes to public health risks, these farms and markets are much like the live animal market in Wuhan where the novel coronavirus is widely believed to have originated," said Jason Baker, Senior Vice President at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). "Filthy fur farms are packed with sick, stressed, and injured animals and are breeding grounds for disease." Studies also suggest mink are particularly prone to coronavirus infection and could transmit the virus back into humans. "If the objective is to reduce transmission, then yes, having these mink farms is a big risk because it makes it much more difficult to manage the epidemic and creates such big reservoirs of susceptible hosts," said Francois Balloux, a geneticist with University College London and co-author of a recent paper on COVID-19 transmission in minks. But while authorities have stepped up checks and offered free coronavirus tests at some bigger breeding facilities, Beijing is seen unlikely to crack down on an industry that earns an estimated $50 billion per year in China alone. Prices rising Chinese mink suppliers and traders who had been struggling in recent years due to declining overseas demand are already benefiting from rising prices. "It felt great," said Wang He, a Shangcun trader and breeder, whose earnings increased 30-50 per cent when the price of mink fur jumped after Denmark ordered the cull. Chinese demand has remained strong, with rising wealth and little in the way of animal rights activism. But the coronavirus outbreak triggered a blanket ban on all wildlife trading in China, forcing some smaller breeders out of business and causing "panic", according to an industry association. In April, the government said mink, arctic fox, and raccoon would be classified as "special livestock" rather than wildlife, and would therefore be exempt from the ban. There are now signs the market is responding to the culls in Denmark, which was responsible for about 40 per cent of worldwide output. Many Chinese farmers were considering abandoning the business altogether, said Zhao Yangang, another mink trader. "They were preparing to stop rearing but now the markets started to move like this they've started breeding again," he said. Inspections China is well-aware of the health risks of intensive mink farming, known to be a source of infectious diseases like rabies and distemper. Most larger breeding facilities are subject to rigorous vaccination and hygiene regimes. Wang the fur trader and breeder, said after the Danish cull was announced, China began administering free COVID-19 tests for captive minks. "They came to my farm in Dalian and tested minks from five spots in the farm," he said. But a wider crackdown is not expected as fur farming has been a relatively cheap way for local governments to alleviate poverty in rural communities and rustbelt regions such as Hebei, where it provides earning opportunities for laid-off industrial workers. Still, experts say the health risks posed by minks cannot be separated from the conditions in which animals are kept. "Minks are susceptible but we should not forget the conditions they are housed in," said Balloux. "There are very large populations in cages, living on top of one another, and the numbers are insane."

Why China could be the big winner from mink culled in Denmark over coronavirus fears

After nearly thirty years of getting some of the biggest celebrities strip for its campaign against animal cruelty, PETA has decided to retire its iconic "I'd Rather Go Naked than Wear Fur" campaign.&nbsp;

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) believes that the campaign is no longer necessary with an increasing number of designers, labels and retailers saying no to using animal skins and fur.&nbsp;

PETA announced the demise of its anti-fur campaign on Tuesday.&nbsp;

Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/peta-slams-justin-bieber-for-spending-35k-on-exotic-cats-253632">PETA slams Justin Bieber for spending $35K on exotic cats</a>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
After three decades, PETA is retiring our iconic <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RatherGoNaked?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RatherGoNaked</a> Than Wear Fur campaign! 
 
It's 2020 &amp; nearly every top designer has ditched fur — we're wrapping up this successful campaign and focusing on an end to the cruel leather and wool industries too. <a href="https://t.co/F9OU3Mkoq3">https://t.co/F9OU3Mkoq3</a>
— PETA (@peta) <a href="https://twitter.com/peta/status/1225119103851081728?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 5, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"It’s time for this iconic campaign to go the way of the mink stole, so that PETA can focus on other areas in which animals still need a great deal of help, including in the leather, wool, and exotic skins trades," PETA said in a release.&nbsp;

"The 30-year campaign began in 1990, when rock icons The Go-Go’s posed in the buff for a “We’d Rather Go-Go Naked Than Wear Fur” poster, which they sold at concerts to raise money for PETA," it added.&nbsp;

The campaign saw some of the biggest names in the showbiz world appear in the advertisement of the campaign from supermodels like Pamela Anderson and Tyra Banks to singing sensations like P!nk and Tommy Lee.&nbsp;

"I’m proud to have been a part of this iconic campaign! After 30 years,&nbsp;@PETA is ENDING their #RatherGoNaked Than Wear Fur ads. Nearly every designer has stopped using fur AND cities, states, and countries are banning it all over the world. Fur is DEAD," Pamela Anderson tweeted out earlier this week.&nbsp;

After nearly thirty years of getting some of the biggest celebrities strip for its campaign against animal cruelty, PETA has decided to retire its iconic "I'd Rather Go Naked than Wear Fur" campaign.

After nearly thirty years of getting some of the biggest celebrities strip for its campaign against animal cruelty, PETA has decided to retire its iconic "I'd Rather Go Naked than Wear Fur" campaign. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) believes that the campaign is no longer necessary with an increasing number of designers, labels and retailers saying no to using animal skins and fur. PETA announced the demise of its anti-fur campaign on Tuesday. Also read: PETA slams Justin Bieber for spending $35K on exotic cats After three decades, PETA is retiring our iconic #RatherGoNaked Than Wear Fur campaign! It's 2020 & nearly every top designer has ditched fur — we're wrapping up this successful campaign and focusing on an end to the cruel leather and wool industries too. https://t.co/F9OU3Mkoq3 — PETA (@peta) February 5, 2020 × "It’s time for this iconic campaign to go the way of the mink stole, so that PETA can focus on other areas in which animals still need a great deal of help, including in the leather, wool, and exotic skins trades," PETA said in a release. "The 30-year campaign began in 1990, when rock icons The Go-Go’s posed in the buff for a “We’d Rather Go-Go Naked Than Wear Fur” poster, which they sold at concerts to raise money for PETA," it added. The campaign saw some of the biggest names in the showbiz world appear in the advertisement of the campaign from supermodels like Pamela Anderson and Tyra Banks to singing sensations like P!nk and Tommy Lee. "I’m proud to have been a part of this iconic campaign! After 30 years, @PETA is ENDING their #RatherGoNaked Than Wear Fur ads. Nearly every designer has stopped using fur AND cities, states, and countries are banning it all over the world. Fur is DEAD," Pamela Anderson tweeted out earlier this week.

After 3 decades, PETA retires iconic 'I'd Rather Go Naked than Wear Fur' campaign

Monkeys lack standing to sue for copyright protection and an animal rights group cannot act as legal guardian in such matters, a US&nbsp;appeals court ruled on Monday, in a battle over ownership of a smiling "selfie" taken by an endangered macaque.

The dispute stemmed from a famous image that Naruto, a rare crested macaque who lives on a nature reserve, snapped using a camera that British photographer David Slater left mounted and unattended during a 2011 trip.

His grinning visage, which Slater published in a wildlife book, went viral and triggered the long-running legal battle over who had the copyright, the animal who snapped the picture or the nature photographer who owned the camera.

"The panel held that the monkey lacked statutory standing because the Copyright Act does not expressly authorize animals to file copyright infringement suits," said the judges of the 9th US&nbsp;Circuit Court of Appeals based in San Francisco.

Their opinion added that the group, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), which filed as a plaintiff on behalf of Naruto, was not a "next friend" of the monkey in a legal sense and failed to establish that it had a significant relationship with him.

"Denying him (Naruto) the right to sue under the U.S. Copyright Act emphasizes what PETA has argued all along — that he is discriminated against simply because he's a nonhuman animal," Jeff Kerr, the general counsel to PETA, said in a statement.

PETA had argued the monkey was the legal owner of all photos he took. But a federal judge in San Francisco ruled in January 2016 that copyright law does not apply to animals.

A settlement was reached out of court in the case last year. Attorneys for Naruto and Slater announced that Slater had agreed to donate 25 percent of future revenue from the photograph to charitable groups that protect Naruto and other members of his species in Indonesia.

It was not clear how much the photograph has been worth to Slater, who previously said that fewer than 100 copies of his self-published book had been sold, despite the publicity.

The case was brought in a US&nbsp;court because Slater's book was available for sale in the United States.

The dispute stemmed from a famous image that Naruto, a rare crested macaque who lives on a nature reserve, snapped using a camera that British photographer David Slater left mounted and unattended during a 2011 trip

Monkeys lack standing to sue for copyright protection and an animal rights group cannot act as legal guardian in such matters, a US appeals court ruled on Monday, in a battle over ownership of a smiling "selfie" taken by an endangered macaque. The dispute stemmed from a famous image that Naruto, a rare crested macaque who lives on a nature reserve, snapped using a camera that British photographer David Slater left mounted and unattended during a 2011 trip. His grinning visage, which Slater published in a wildlife book, went viral and triggered the long-running legal battle over who had the copyright, the animal who snapped the picture or the nature photographer who owned the camera. "The panel held that the monkey lacked statutory standing because the Copyright Act does not expressly authorize animals to file copyright infringement suits," said the judges of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals based in San Francisco. Their opinion added that the group, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), which filed as a plaintiff on behalf of Naruto, was not a "next friend" of the monkey in a legal sense and failed to establish that it had a significant relationship with him. "Denying him (Naruto) the right to sue under the U.S. Copyright Act emphasizes what PETA has argued all along — that he is discriminated against simply because he's a nonhuman animal," Jeff Kerr, the general counsel to PETA, said in a statement. PETA had argued the monkey was the legal owner of all photos he took. But a federal judge in San Francisco ruled in January 2016 that copyright law does not apply to animals. A settlement was reached out of court in the case last year. Attorneys for Naruto and Slater announced that Slater had agreed to donate 25 percent of future revenue from the photograph to charitable groups that protect Naruto and other members of his species in Indonesia. It was not clear how much the photograph has been worth to Slater, who previously said that fewer than 100 copies of his self-published book had been sold, despite the publicity. The case was brought in a US court because Slater's book was available for sale in the United States.

Monkey in 'selfie' cannot sue for copyright, US court says