Propagation Prohibited - ?

[The Mama Chicken]

I haven't taken patent law yet (next semester!), but here's some advice based on my basic understanding of the matter:

When you buy plants normally, part of the expectation is that you can recreate/propagate/breed them as you see fit. When they add that tag you then know you're just buying one plant, not something you can grow more plants from. It's like buying a neutered dog.

But here's the thing. Plants make seeds and offshoots. You have no control over that and you can't be expected to stop them from doing it. The creators were capable of making the plant non-propagatable (like mules!) but they chose not to, assumably because it's very costly to make each plant in the variety individually rather than using the seeds of an existing plant - something an individual grower would be willing to do, but that goes against the nature of companies. They made the conscious choice to save money in the creation process rather than having the chance to sell more plants. Their patent protects them from willful propogation. But if your plant happens to go to see or create offshoots or interbreed with some other plant, who are they planning on suing? The bees? Your fantastic soil?

Any plants created in this way therefore belong to you (you own the plant, cared for the plant, the plant reproduced - you own the reproduction) and can be used by you without legal ramifications.

So, obviously don't sell them. And if you want to replant them for your own use (not selling the fruits, not selling the seeds - giving away of fruits is probably ok) no one is going to come after you. The reason behind the patent is so they can sue you if you create your own variety using theirs as a base and then sell them for a profit. No one is going to come after you if you grow them for your own use - really they can't come after you if you sell the fruit at a farmer's market either - because how do they know you definitively did not save seeds from your original purchase?

If you're really paranoid then just leave one fruit of each plant in the garden, let them self-propagate, spread them out when they sprout. But they definitely will not sue you if you save seed and replant for your own personal use. The cost of litigation is not worth the value they would get back from suing you. Patent is seriously just a deterrent. A stay off the grass sign.

All of the above is true unless it's "roundup ready" crops and the patent holder is Monsanto. In that case they will sue, and win. Even if you didn't want their stupid pollen on your land in the first place.

Monsanto is known for suing family farmers who's farms were contaminated by their products. It's not about the money, it's all about control. They want to control the food supply, from seed to table. They do not "create" some of the varieties that they patent, they are simply the first in line at the patent office. They are also seeking patents on animal genes, did they create pigs or cows?

 

[vfem]

Farmers are in suit now against monsanto in a reversal of legal battle that they did not STEAL from Monsanto, so much so as their crops were 'infected' by Monsanto holding them responsible. I had a feeling this would come up in this conversation! LOL

So here's a link for outside knowledge on that, so you can keep up with the legal proceedings:

http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/sign/farmersvs_monsanto/

As for how I look at it, the farmers are correct. I'm sure very few would DARE to steal from Monsanto knowing how they are to 'sue' constantly. I look at it this way.

Ex. A lab invents a virus they are testing. The virus escapes and people become infected. How does the lab get to sue infected people for stealing their virus they created with a patient? Those people were infected from an outside source against their will. The lab is to blame, not the people. Just my opinion though.

 

[1iora]

Farmers are in suit now against monsanto in a reversal of legal battle that they did not STEAL from Monsanto, so much so as their crops were 'infected' by Monsanto holding them responsible. I had a feeling this would come up in this conversation! LOL

So here's a link for outside knowledge on that, so you can keep up with the legal proceedings:

http://action.fooddemocracynow.org/sign/farmersvs_monsanto/

As for how I look at it, the farmers are correct. I'm sure very few would DARE to steal from Monsanto knowing how they are to 'sue' constantly. I look at it this way.

Ex. A lab invents a virus they are testing. The virus escapes and people become infected. How does the lab get to sue infected people for stealing their virus they created with a patient? Those people were infected from an outside source against their will. The lab is to blame, not the people. Just my opinion though.

That was my first instinct when I saw that - definitely more of an infection than a theft.

 

[Detlor Poultry]

Okay, my two cents on patenting...

(this is part of my 'policy' on my page)
You shouldn't patent or copyright something you didn't invent yourself. Like the Mama Chicken said, have we created pigs or cattle or corn or petunias or giant pumpkins or cornish chickens or anything? NO! In fact, there aren't even any genes we've created. We only have what has been provided to us, and, maybe we can manipulate that in scary ways, but, we didn't ever take random elements and form a living plant species out of a little speck, and despite the theological aspect of it, when you think about it, we have actually accomplished very little compared to what's actually happened in these creatures. If you didn't literally form it yourself, don't monopolize it! It's not your's!

And about monsanto; I agree. The farmers are right. Our heritage corn is better than their genetically defiled corn, and why would we want their corn, or crosses from their corn? It sometimes almost seems like they have a tank-truck filled with pollen that they drive up and down country roads in the middle of the night.....
Besides, if you didn't want something stolen, wouldn't you try to protect it? No, this can't be a matter of theft (if it is, it's really stupid). This is a matter of: 'Okay boss, we now control the world's supply of food, now let's start charging people for the air they breath'. Apparently taxes didn't produce enough revenue...

 

[vfem]

My view is it shouldn't be legal to create something and patient it if nature can control it as it sees fit. Such as open pollination. One can not control bees or wind! It's too easy for mix ups to happen, if said created plant can not be controlled (or genetically modified FISH, whole 'nother topic) then it should not be allowed to be patiented or controlled by a company or person. If I created a cat breed and it got out and started breeding outside my control; I can't control my product of my creation. I shouldn't be able to sue anyone who owes a cat that cross bred with it. It just seems insane.

However, if you create a hybrid plant with a mix all your own, and the seeds from plant are sterile and it doesn't cross pollinate with other plants of its geno (?) then I could patient it and no one else can create that same cross and sell the seeds or cross plants. It would be a lab creation only, I can exhibit control of the product.

Both situations seem different to me.

However, I don't know patient laws as they are now... but that is something I would suggest as a good tweak.

IMHO

 

[hoodat]

The original patent law prohibited the patenting of living things. It was only after the big money boys started spreading money around that they got changed. Now, believe it or not, there are parts of your own genetic makeup that are owned by someone other than you.

 

[vfem]

The original patent law prohibited the patenting of living things. It was only after the big money boys started spreading money around that they got changed. Now, believe it or not, there are parts of your own genetic makeup that are owned by someone other than you.

You're freaking me out!!!

 

[Detlor Poultry]

Now, believe it or not, there are parts of your own genetic makeup that are owned by someone other than you.

Which parts are they? The poisonous Mercury that get's stuck in our bodies when we get a flu shot? I'm sure that's owned by somebody. But what did you mean? What part of of me is owned by someone else? And why would anybody want part of my genetic makeup?!?! Like vfem said, that's scary...

 

[vfem]

Now, believe it or not, there are parts of your own genetic makeup that are owned by someone other than you.

Which parts are they? The poisonous Mercury that get's stuck in our bodies when we get a flu shot? I'm sure that's owned by somebody. But what did you mean? What part of of me is owned by someone else? And why would anybody want part of my genetic makeup?!?! Like vfem said, that's scary...

They can have the access fat cells in my thighs. I am MORE then happy to give those back!!! Hahahaha

 

[hoodat]

Now, believe it or not, there are parts of your own genetic makeup that are owned by someone other than you.

Which parts are they? The poisonous Mercury that get's stuck in our bodies when we get a flu shot? I'm sure that's owned by somebody. But what did you mean? What part of of me is owned by someone else? And why would anybody want part of my genetic makeup?!?! Like vfem said, that's scary...

Labs that test blood samples or other tissue samples have contracts with big pharmaceutical corporations. Whenever they run across something that seems different samples are sent to those companies for testing. If they find something in your genetic makeup that is unusual that part will be isolated and patented by the company just in case it may be useful somewhere down the road.
Somewhere in all those papers you signed at the hospital or doctors office is fine print which gives those companies the rights to do that and even if you never signed such an agreement how would you know they did it?
Lets take, for example, the billion to one shot that something in your genetic makeup makes you immune to cancer. That part of your genetic makeup would make billions for the company that owned the patent but you would never even know that it came fom one of your blood samples.
It may seem to be a paranoid statement but the fact is that it goes on every day.