Edit - Can’t reply again looks like but to the response below, yes many view this approach as effectively leading to enforcing what you state. Which is why it is so horribly underhanded to me, and seeing supporting narratives in hackernews was striking.
1. Bowman buys Monsanto soybeans as seeds agreeing to not replant the soybean harvest.
2. Bowman sells the soybean harvest to a food wholesaler who sells to retailers who sells to consumers for consumption.
3. Bowman buys soybeans back from that same food wholesaler (who normally only sells for consumption) intending to replant those food soybeans (which is abnormal).
4. Bowman then tests the seeds he bought to verify which ones were the ones he sold which had the Monsanto modifications (or his neighbors who were also using Monsanto seeds with the same contract) and which he was not allowed to replant as per the contract in 1.
5. Bowman then only replants the ones with the modifications and uses Roundup in those fields.
6. Bowman then repeatedly saves and replants seeds from that crop to amplify their quantity of modified crop and purchases more seeds from the food wholesaler.
It was about as premeditated and intentional a contract violation as you can get.
There have been court cases, but in most cases, they weren't simply "innocent farmer happened to grow IP-infringing crop simply due to being near a farm that used GMO crops and cross-pollinating by accident".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowman_v._Monsanto_Co.
“ The usual Monsanto claim involves patent infringement by intentionally replanting patented seed”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_legal_cases
Edit - Can’t reply again looks like but to the response below, yes many view this approach as effectively leading to enforcing what you state. Which is why it is so horribly underhanded to me, and seeing supporting narratives in hackernews was striking.
Doesn't this mean that farmers will no longer be able to reuse their own seeds then, if a neighbor has GMO seeds?
3 replies →
Meaning it didn’t happen, or the farmers aren’t as innocent as the word innocent legally implies?
Comment could be considered misleading…
To use the example provided by the anti-Monsanto upthread poster as a example of Monsanto being underhanded:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowman_v._Monsanto_Co
1. Bowman buys Monsanto soybeans as seeds agreeing to not replant the soybean harvest.
2. Bowman sells the soybean harvest to a food wholesaler who sells to retailers who sells to consumers for consumption.
3. Bowman buys soybeans back from that same food wholesaler (who normally only sells for consumption) intending to replant those food soybeans (which is abnormal).
4. Bowman then tests the seeds he bought to verify which ones were the ones he sold which had the Monsanto modifications (or his neighbors who were also using Monsanto seeds with the same contract) and which he was not allowed to replant as per the contract in 1.
5. Bowman then only replants the ones with the modifications and uses Roundup in those fields.
6. Bowman then repeatedly saves and replants seeds from that crop to amplify their quantity of modified crop and purchases more seeds from the food wholesaler.
It was about as premeditated and intentional a contract violation as you can get.
What's the example on the other end of the spectrum?
1 reply →
There have been court cases, but in most cases, they weren't simply "innocent farmer happened to grow IP-infringing crop simply due to being near a farm that used GMO crops and cross-pollinating by accident".