Whether or not a virus is living largely depends on how you define the word 'living', as Wittgenstein would probably point out if he was on LFGSS.
That was my point, but the article seems to think its important, since it mentions that it isn't living more than once. I just find it slightly bizarre, but pretty benign
Yep, it's an odd piece. A combination of the bleeding obvious, some spurious bollocks, and some really bad science. And, like you say, a weird obsession on whether a virus is alive or not. Which is rather besides the point, particularly when you consider the damage that prions have done.
That was my point, but the article seems to think its important, since it mentions that it isn't living more than once. I just find it slightly bizarre, but pretty benign