Supreme Court hands Monsanto victory over farmers on GMO seed patents, ability to sue
53 replies, posted
[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;43527900]That's a funny way of saying "Glad to see massive monopolized business interests and the US government are still butt buddies."[/QUOTE]
I think it's more a matter of them not being able to rule otherwise, for fear of setting some nasty precedents.
There's a whole lot of gray in the legal system. All you can do is limit the damage in the long run.
[QUOTE=Xyrofen;43528441]I think a lot of people feel the desire to rise up/protest/do something about Monsanto, but there's a huge problem in trying to collaborate or individually deal with a company that makes [URL="http://pdf.secdatabase.com/2347/0000950123-11-101537.pdf"]over 11 billion USD gross a year[/URL] and [URL="http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2012/snapshots/11092.html"]is worth over 42 billion USD[/URL].[/QUOTE]
Personally I wish that something would bring dire misfortune and actual damage to the individuals responsible for the Monsato Heresy. Personally if someone kidnapped those responsible then trapped them in a room with no food, that would be poetic justice; their actions would lead to an irritation of the current food crisis, thus they get the privilege of experiencing first-hand the nightmarish hunger that could result. Either they would all starve to death, or there would be only one left in the end, who survived only by killing and eating their peers, and suffers a lifetime of humiliation and imprisonment for murder and cannibalism.
When you encounter a threat, you do not simply eliminate them; you make an example of them so the rest of the human race can learn from their dire mistakes, so that such threats become fewer and further between.
[QUOTE=ironman17;43528819]Personally I wish that something would bring dire misfortune and actual damage to the individuals responsible for the Monsato Heresy. Personally if someone kidnapped those responsible then trapped them in a room with no food, that would be poetic justice; their actions would lead to an irritation of the current food crisis, thus they get the privilege of experiencing first-hand the nightmarish hunger that could result. Either they would all starve to death, or there would be only one left in the end, who survived only by killing and eating their peers, and suffers a lifetime of humiliation and imprisonment for murder and cannibalism.
When you encounter a threat, you do not simply eliminate them; you make an example of them so the rest of the human race can learn from their dire mistakes, so that such threats become fewer and further between.[/QUOTE]
You are a very disturbed individual.
That doesn't mean that Monsato should not be utterly annihilated. It's simple fact; if you see something fail spectacularly, you look at what they did wrong and learn from their mistakes. In Monsato's case, you learn not to be a huge fucking threat to the entire human race and planet Earth as a whole with plutocratic bullshit and patenting.
[QUOTE=deadoon;43528749]If you can make something that another company has patented, and produce it for selling, that company can sue you.
The problem here is that the patented object in question is self propagating in nature.[/QUOTE]
And that's what is so pernicious about this; the ability for a company to use patent law to regulate the use and life cycle of a living organism has all kinds of awful implications about the future of genetic modification that extends far beyond just the wholesale market for seeds. I'd like to think that genetics research could lead to a brighter future for humanity with new treatments for illnesses and replacement body parts and healthier livestock but the introduction of America's draconian copyright law into that future casts a shadow over all of that. At the very least it will mirror the current state of the American pharmaceutical industry wherein a huge number of people who suffer from treatable illnesses are unable to have their conditions treated because the patenting of drugs has allowed pharmaceutical companies to get away with extortionary pricing of their products.
[QUOTE=ironman17;43528869]That doesn't mean that Monsato should not be utterly annihilated. It's simple fact; if you see something fail spectacularly, you look at what they did wrong and learn from their mistakes. In Monsato's case, you learn not to be a huge fucking threat to the entire human race and planet Earth as a whole with their plutocratic bullshit.[/QUOTE]
So because their business management is a bunch of assholes, all of their research and development should be halted immediately?
Just because they are assholes, doesn't mean that others don't benefit from their developments.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;43528886]And that's what is so pernicious about this; the ability for a company to use patent law to regulate the use and life cycle of a living organism has all kinds of awful implications about the future of genetic modification that extends far beyond just the wholesale market for seeds. I'd like to think that genetics research could lead to a brighter future for humanity with new treatments for illnesses and replacement body parts and healthier livestock but the introduction of America's draconian copyright law into that future casts a shadow over all of that. At the very least it will mirror the current state of the American pharmaceutical industry wherein a huge number of people who suffer from treatable illnesses are unable to have their conditions treated because the patenting of drugs has allowed pharmaceutical companies to get away with extortionary pricing of their products.[/QUOTE]
The problem with the current system and that way of thinking is that if they rule that you can replant their designer GMO seeds without issue, there are only two ways the market can go from there. Terminator seeds to enforce repeat purchases, or the market completely collapses as nobody will rebuy seeds due to it is cheaper to just replant.
Do you really want extremely limited development or the development of terminator seeds?
Also, I do agree the pharmaceutical industry needs a whole lot more regulation regarding excessive profits.
[QUOTE=Sector 7;43527896]You're either sarcastic or a complete idiot.
You can't release a GMO into the environment and then sue people when it starts growing on their land.
Well, you can now. What a legal clusterfuck.[/QUOTE]
just wait till people become GMOs, then monsanto can OWN you
[QUOTE=ironman17;43528819]Personally I wish that something would bring dire misfortune and actual damage to the individuals responsible for the Monsato Heresy. Personally if someone kidnapped those responsible then trapped them in a room with no food, that would be poetic justice; their actions would lead to an irritation of the current food crisis, thus they get the privilege of experiencing first-hand the nightmarish hunger that could result. Either they would all starve to death, or there would be only one left in the end, who survived only by killing and eating their peers, and suffers a lifetime of humiliation and imprisonment for murder and cannibalism.
When you encounter a threat, you do not simply eliminate them; you make an example of them so the rest of the human race can learn from their dire mistakes, so that such threats become fewer and further between.[/QUOTE]
Going off that post alone, I don't know if you're insane or just saying stuff for the sake of it.
what sucks is they essentially ordered the court to do this
[quote]The appeals court decision was based on Monsanto’s supposed promise not to sue farmers whose crops - including corn, soybeans, cotton, canola and others - contained traces of the company’s biotechnology products.
In a June 2013 ruling, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, DC said it was inevitable, as the farmers’ argued, that contamination from Monsanto’s products would occur. Yet the appeals panel also said the plaintiffs do not have standing to prohibit Monsanto from suing them should the company’s genetic traits end up on their holdings "because Monsanto has made binding assurances that it will not 'take legal action against growers whose crops might inadvertently contain traces of Monsanto biotech genes (because, for example, some transgenic seed or pollen blew onto the grower's land).'"[/quote]
right so essentially any company can get a dystopian-like monopoly as long as they promise not to sue.......
they also threatened to shut down their GMO department like a baby if they lost, which the court probably took into account too
[QUOTE=Sableye;43528936]what sucks is they essentially ordered the court to do this
right so essentially any company can get a dystopian-like monopoly as long as they promise not to sue.......
they also threatened to shut down their GMO department like a baby if they lost, which the court probably took into account too[/QUOTE]
Binding agreements are punishable legally if not followed, I already noted this.
Also, if they cannot profit off of their developments, they may as well shut down that department. Due to nothing they make can be marketed profitably, unless they are terminator seeds, which they don't want.
well this decision just proves they are a protected monopoly, the same thing like this happened with AT&T for decades, they promised not to do x so they got protected from y.
they would still make plenty off of their GMOs even if this decision went the wrong way, no reason to threaten to shut down it all, remember monsanto does a lot more than GMOs
Come on people read this part as it is very important as to what they think, though they may not be truthful in this comment.
Article posted:
[quote]"Monsanto never has and has committed it never will sue if our patented seed or traits are found in a farmer's field as a result of inadvertent means," said Kyle McClain, the Monsanto's chief litigation counsel, according to Reuters.[/quote]
I don't trust companies that will do shit like this:
[QUOTE]In 2003, Monsanto sued Oakhurst Dairy over Oakhurst's label on its milk cartons that said "Our farmer's pledge: no artificial hormones," referring to the use of bovine somatotropin (rBST).[199] Monsanto argued that the label implied that Oakhurst milk was superior to milk from cows treated with rBST, which harmed Monsanto's business.[199] The two companies settled out of court, and it was announced that Oakhurst would add the word "used" at the end of its label, and note that the U.S. FDA claims there is no major difference between milk from rBST-treated and non rBST-treated cows.[200][/QUOTE]
But sure, you go ahead and believe that they will keep their promise not to sue those farmers. I'll live in reality where they will sue anyone they want as long as it is profitable to them.
[QUOTE=Sableye;43529066]well this decision just proves they are a protected monopoly, the same thing like this happened with AT&T for decades, they promised not to do x so they got protected from y.
they would still make plenty off of their GMOs even if this decision went the wrong way, no reason to threaten to shut down it all, remember monsanto does a lot more than GMOs[/QUOTE]
Would you rather that if the ruling was bad for them, they just pack up business instantly without notifying anyone? I see it as them saying that as fair warning.
[QUOTE=deadoon;43529246]Would you rather that if the ruling was bad for them, they just pack up business instantly without notifying anyone? I see it as them saying that as fair warning.[/QUOTE]
they wouldn't pack up the buisness, its a world class bluff. both apple AND samsung said they would close their cellphone buisnesses if the other guy won, guess what? they didnt
[QUOTE=Sableye;43529279]they wouldn't pack up the buisness, its a world class bluff. both apple AND samsung said they would close their cellphone buisnesses if the other guy won, guess what? they didnt[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]The plaintiffs asked Monsanto to pledge not to sue, but the company rebuffed the request, saying, "A blanket covenant not to sue any present or future member of petitioners' organizations would enable virtually anyone to commit intentional infringement."[/QUOTE]
If the department cannot produce products that they can profit off of due to legislation or rulings, what is the point in keeping that department around?
Seriously, if it was ruled that they couldn't sue for it their only options are effectively shut it down or develop terminator seeds.
[QUOTE=Sableye;43529279]they wouldn't pack up the buisness, its a world class bluff. both apple AND samsung said they would close their cellphone buisnesses if the other guy won, guess what? they didnt[/QUOTE]
Probably because they could still turn a profit.
Barring them from suing entirely would sort of make that part a little bit difficult.
Afaik this is pretty old news.
And they did sue people about this ~ even if the people they sued were also in the wrong in their actions.
[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percy_Schmeiser[/URL]
The monsanto seeds came to his farm by accident, sadly he started growing them (albeit separately) on purpose.
This, however, I find even more concerning:
[URL]http://action.sumofus.org/a/brazil-terminator-seeds/4/2/[/URL]
[quote=article]Under pressure from big commercial farms,[B] the Brazilian parliament is about to hold a vote that will allow companies like Monsanto, Bayer, and others to start selling so-called ‘suicide seeds’ to farmers.[/B] The genetically modified seeds can only be used once, forcing small farmers into buying seeds from Monsanto or others over and over again -- literally forever.[/quote]
[editline]14th January 2014[/editline]
Also, traces of less than 1% seem quite impossible.
I don't think I've ever heard of Monsato
[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;43527900]That's a funny way of saying "Glad to see massive monopolized business interests and the US government are still butt buddies."[/QUOTE]
All hail capitalism!
[QUOTE=maxumym;43532408]I don't think I've ever heard of Monsato[/QUOTE]
You can't talk to any modern farmer without hearing them complain about Monsato's bullshit.
[QUOTE=O Cheerios O;43532997]You can't talk to any modern farmer without hearing them complain about Monsato's bullshit.[/QUOTE]
Though reading the amount of people spelling Monsanto wrong proves not enough people know them and their sneaky shenanigans.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.