I'm all with you there.
You are painting an extreme false dilemma of poor family breeders working with heirlooms vs modern breeders creating varieties that need patenting. There are many decades of conventional breeding between heirlooms and gmo varieties.
There are no good reasons to patent plants. New breeding methods, transgenesis, mixing genes from different species, do not make plant patents any more sensible. Breeder rights already cover and protect breeders and allows them to earn back their investment and much more, as Monsanto and many others have proven already for years. Plant patents are not required to advance breeding and is not better for innovation, on the very contrary. Monsanto is not interested in just making their investement back either, they want it back in 1000-fold.
Patents also help the little guy. Without a patent big guys will make your new product cheaper and quicker than you could. Inventors around the world need patents, especially the little guys.Ownership and control over IP isn't the only way you can make a return by investing in R&D. People said the exact same thing about software development and then GNU came along all on its own...
There's no proof that patents streamline the design process. They're just there to help large corporations totally own industries without fear of competition.
Patents also help the little guy. Without a patent big guys will make your new product cheaper and quicker than you could. Inventors around the world need patents, especially the little guys.
I think this conversation is more about politics than farming![]()
Patents also help the little guy. Without a patent big guys will make your new product cheaper and quicker than you could. Inventors around the world need patents, especially the little guys.
I think this conversation is more about politics than farming![]()
Patents also help the little guy. Without a patent big guys will make your new product cheaper and quicker than you could. Inventors around the world need patents, especially the little guys.
I think this conversation is more about politics than farming![]()
I'm scared of the new era where big business can produce everything, and no longer needs my labor.
You're an idiot if you think someone should be able to sue over pollinating their own flowers and making seeds. It has nothing to do with capitalism. "because you're planting someone else's work". Give me a break...
I suppose you think that if your children have kids that they are the result of your work too and you should have ownership rights over them. That's not how genetics works.
How about all the wonderful GMO fruit and vegetables in most grocery stores. They look beautiful and don't bruise easily which is good for transport but all the flavor has been bred out of them and they taste like you're eating cardboard.
How about all the wonderful GMO fruit and vegetables in most grocery stores. They look beautiful and don't bruise easily which is good for transport but all the flavor has been bred out of them and they taste like you're eating cardboard.
Well children and plants aren't exactly the same. We are talking business not just genetics. And currently yes, you can get sued for planting someone else's plants if you didn't buy it. We sign contracts annually promising not to replant the seed.
That isn't new. The drifting of pollen controversy is new, but not ownership of strains. That actually goes back millennia. The Dutch protected the tulip, the English wouldn't let others grow tea, the Mongols killed people who tried to take silk worms. Monsanto is certainly nicer than the mongols gotta give em that at least.
Hey Farmer,don't you have a Trump rally to go to or something.
I feel sorry for you if you feel the only thing you have of value to offer the market is labor.