• If you need help identifying a pepper, disease, or plant issue, please post in Identification.

High Court Rules for Monsanto in Seed Patent Case

AlphaHydroponics

AlphaHydroponics

So, here is the link to the WSJ article from today http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323716304578480883218514720.html?mod=WSJ_hps_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsFifth

It may require a subscription to view. Those who can't view please email me with your address and I can send you a link via email that you should be able to access.

To summarize the article briefly (excluding errors and omissions):

Monsanto holds a patent on several varieties of seed (ie: resists this or that).
They successfully sued a farmer who knowingly used the offspring seed (collected his seeds at harvest to replant in subsequent seasons) on the basis that the seeds are Monsanto's, due to the genetic patent of the seed.
The court awarded Monsanto an $84K judgement against the farmer for using "their seed".

Are hot peppers next?

I figure this may generate quite the debate... so let er rip.

Regards, Chris
 
Can't read it. Do you have the judgement reference number ? Which court said that ? USA Supreme ?
 
No different than many Rose bushes or flower varieties where it is illegal to propagate those as well.
The developer has a patent on the plant and so you would need to pay a royalty to them if you do propagate them.
Same would be true of some peppers as with any other vegetable developed under a patent.
 
Bowman v. Monsanto Co., 11-796

i dont see the controversy. guys reaping the rewards of someone elses intellectual property with out compensating them. how is this not just plain IP theft? regardless of how "evil" said company is.

im aware of some of the other controversies regarding monsanto supposedly sueing people whos crops were open pollinated by adjacent farms. this one however seems to be fairly cut and dried.

imo this technology is worth protecting, as its potential is beyond substantial. without the incentive of massive profits i cant see how anyone would embark on any massive scale research.

that being said, have 0 knowledge of the finer points of this case. or law in general.
 
queequeg152 said:
Bowman v. Monsanto Co., 11-796

i dont see the controversy. guys reaping the rewards of someone elses intellectual property with out compensating them. how is this not just plain IP theft? regardless of how "evil" said company is.

im aware of some of the other controversies regarding monsanto supposedly sueing people whos crops were open pollinated by adjacent farms. this one however seems to be fairly cut and dried.

imo this technology is worth protecting, as its potential is beyond substantial. without the incentive of massive profits i cant see how anyone would embark on any massive scale research.

that being said, have 0 knowledge of the finer points of this case. or law in general.
Click to expand...

As much as I hate Monsanto, I have to agree, this particular farmer seemed to be trying to find a loophole in IP law. He got caught and it seems like he received a fair punishment. I don't think $84,000 is going to cost this guy his farm.

This specific case is completely different from the cases of GMO genetics spreading into fields by wind and resulting in farmer's being sued for theft. Those cases are the ones people should be worried about. Unfortunately, most people will just see the words "Monsanto", "Wins", and "Supreme Court" and they will make a bunch of assumptions without reading it or giving it any critical thought.

Of course, that is what the media is counting on too... the more trend-able words in a headline, the more clicks, the more ad revenue... educating the masses be damned!
 
theghostpepperstore said:
Of course, that is what the media is counting on too... the more trend-able words in a headline, the more clicks, the more ad revenue... educating the masses be damned!
Click to expand...

Like for this one sentence.
Media today is more worried about generating revenue. They can, will and have made errors when reporting just to get more clicks on the article. then when they are found to be wrong they write a retraction and bury it. The masses never see the retraction, they just go on assuming the original article is correct.
 
By the way my "Open Seeds" reference was indeed a question : is there something like this in the USA ?

I mean Richard Stallman already put a hand into seeds ?
 
All US patents have a finite life span which I think is ten or twenty years. Monsanto will be up a creek without a paddle once the patents expire. Think of the drug industry. As soon as generics can be made, they are and the company with the original patent has to find another cash cow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top