Harmony Central Forums
Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Monsanto drags over 400 U.S. farmers to court over GM seed patents

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse









X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Monsanto drags over 400 U.S. farmers to court over GM seed patents

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/monsanto-drags-over-400-u-s-farmers-to-court-over-gm-seed-patents-when-will-big-ags-corrupt-reign-end.html

    When will Big Ag

    Man's Got To Know His Limitations........

  • #2

    Do you think it's a good thing, or a bad thing, that the farmers are being sued?

    Last edited by Fred Fartboski : Today at...

    Comment


    • kav
      kav commented
      Editing a comment
      Corporations are people.

    • Stonedtone
      Stonedtone commented
      Editing a comment

      That's just good farming. Reuse as much as you can. ****************in BS


    • ASS MURPHY
      ASS MURPHY commented
      Editing a comment

      Fred Fartboski wrote:

      Do you think it's a good thing, or a bad thing, that the farmers are being sued?


      Seriously?

       

       

       

       

       

       


  • #3

    Too bad these farmers couldn't sue monsanto for negligence and loss of product and wages.

    Comment


    • #4
      The farmers want to use Monsantos technology wiithout having to pay for it.

      Comment


      • larry50
        larry50 commented
        Editing a comment

        I wonder what the infringement is.   The farmers didn't create the new seeds, the crops did.  So, who is doing the infringing?  Mere reuse of the seeds doesn't seem like patent infringement to me.  They are using seeds created from plants grown with legally purchased seeds.  So, why aren't the new seeds covered by the original legal purchase?  If the farmers went into a lab, and managed to re-create the same altered seeds, that's something different.  Those seeds would be covered by the Monsanto patent and it would be illegal to sell or even use them commercially.  But, that's not what happened here.

        I just don't see any culpability.  Plus, a standard defense in any patent infringement case is invalidity of the patent.  Perhaps Monsanto is setting itself up for an outcome they won't particularly enjoy, 


    • #5

      Lots of disinformation being spread.

      The facts are:

       

      Monsanto has sued the 144 farms over the course of 16 years since the patent was issued.  These suits weren't all just filed.

      The purchaser for Monsanto's GM seeds agrees the purchase only gives rights for the initial crop, and the purchaser does not own the right to replant seeds from the GM crop.  New seeds must be purchased for each planting.

      As best I can tell, in every case where Monsanto has sued, it's been a farmer trying to get around that replanting clause.  In the Bowman case, he was finding alternate ways to get his hands on GM modified seed and plant it without paying Monsanto for the right to make a crop from their technology.

      The answer, if you want to get around it, is simple:  Don't buy and plant Monsanto seeds.  The OP's article uses statistical slight of hand to inflate the importance of Monsanto's market position:  Along two other huge producers, they account for 53% of the seed market.  That means there are plenty of other seed sources that have no GM component.

      Bottom line:  Monsanto invented a better mousetrap.  If a farmer thinks, on Monsanto's terms, he can do better with Monsanto seeds, he should buy them and abide buy the licensing agreement that is part of the purchase.  Otherwise, plants someone else's seeds.


      Current global warming temperature trend: 0.05ºC per decade, plus or minus 0.1ºC (source: UN IPCC AR5) ...Yes, the error rate is higher than the estimated rate of change.

      "Anthropogenic global warming is a proposed theory whose basic mechanism is well understood, but whose magnitude is highly uncertain. The growing evidence that climate models are too sensitive to CO2 has implications for the attribution of late-20th-century warming and projections of 21st-century climate. If the recent warming hiatus is caused by natural variability, then this raises the question as to what extent the warming between 1975 and 2000 can also be explained by natural climate variability." --Dr. Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology

      Comment



      Working...
      X