Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

75-Year-Old Soybean Planter Loses Against Monsanto In Supreme Court
TBI ^ | Agence France Presse

Posted on 05/13/2013 11:00:31 AM PDT by blam

Edited on 05/13/2013 11:01:11 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

The US Supreme Court ruled in favor of Monsanto Monday over an Indiana farmer accused of having pirated the genetically-modified crops developed by the agribusiness giant.

The high court was unanimous in its decision, ruling that laws limiting patents do "not permit a farmer to reproduce patented seeds through planting and harvesting without the patent holder's permission."


(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia; US: Indiana
KEYWORDS: 3m; agenda21; monsado; scotus; seeds; starvation; un21
One day.....
1 posted on 05/13/2013 11:00:31 AM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: blam
Genetic patents would never have been allowed had the US Patent Office not been overrun by know-nothing affirmative-action types.

Patenting Life by Michael Chrichton

2 posted on 05/13/2013 11:03:35 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Islam is a religion of peace, and Moslems reserve the right to detonate anyone who says otherwise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Also being discussed here: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3018801/posts


3 posted on 05/13/2013 11:04:04 AM PDT by goodwithagun (My gun has killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

Monsanto now effectively controls food supply, because once their GMO POS seeds destroy all others, we will be dependent on their junk science to feed us, and there’s no conclusive data that GMOs are safe for human consumption.

One of the most evil corporations on Earth.


4 posted on 05/13/2013 11:06:14 AM PDT by surroundedbyblue (Why am I both pro-life & pro-gun? Because both positions defend the innocent and protect the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

Control the production of food
Control the distribution of food
Control everything


5 posted on 05/13/2013 11:08:34 AM PDT by svcw (If you are dead when your heart stops, why aren't you alive when it starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: blam

Should there be an exception for old farmers?


6 posted on 05/13/2013 11:09:13 AM PDT by Piranha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: svcw

Yep. There’s alot of FReepers though that don’t get this. Sad.


7 posted on 05/13/2013 11:09:53 AM PDT by surroundedbyblue (Why am I both pro-life & pro-gun? Because both positions defend the innocent and protect the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: blam

Clarence Thomas is a former Monsanto lawyer and he did not recuse himself.


8 posted on 05/13/2013 11:14:48 AM PDT by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

” there’s no conclusive data that GMOs are safe for human consumption.”

Correct


9 posted on 05/13/2013 11:17:46 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

Is there conclusive data that they are UN-safe?


10 posted on 05/13/2013 11:19:59 AM PDT by Double Tap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: blam; Lurking Libertarian; JDW11235; Clairity; TheOldLady; Spacetrucker; Art in Idaho; GregNH; ...

FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.

11 posted on 05/13/2013 11:21:47 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

It’s time someone patents a plant that cross pollinates with Monsanto’s patented crops like bunnies, then plant it around every Monsanto field in America then wait a season or two and then claim all of Monsanto’s crops are theirs!


12 posted on 05/13/2013 11:21:52 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama lied .. the economy died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam

From reading the actual court case it is pretty obvious that Bowman was in the wrong. If he did want to pay Monsanto to use their seeds, he should not have used their seeds.


13 posted on 05/13/2013 11:23:46 AM PDT by Double Tap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

I am fascinated by people who do not get that concept, it is so simple.

Even Micki Obama’s changing or school lunches and the taxpayer funded “move it” videos, falls right in line with the concept.

If I control the production of food
If I control the distribution of food
I control everything


14 posted on 05/13/2013 11:32:26 AM PDT by svcw (If you are dead when your heart stops, why aren't you alive when it starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Double Tap

I think the farmer was clearly in the right.


15 posted on 05/13/2013 12:00:05 PM PDT by Pikachu_Dad (Impeach Sen Quinn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Double Tap

Man...beat me to it.


16 posted on 05/13/2013 12:01:15 PM PDT by DennisR (Look around - God gives countless, indisputable clues that He does, indeed, exist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: blam

QUICK!!

Somebody Patent the Liberal gene!!!

May be only way to control the spread of this DEFECT!!!


17 posted on 05/13/2013 12:01:39 PM PDT by G Larry (Darkness Hates the Light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue
I don't agree with the ruling because it places government power and penalties over how your plants are pollinated. Farmers should be free to use the crops on their property as they see fit.

However, the soy in question in not technically genetically modified (GMO). No gene splicing was done. The plants are grown in a lab environment and simply selected for many generations for resistance to herbicides.

This is similar to how early humans changed many of the plants we use today. For example, corn was originally only a few inches long and not very tasty. Humans kept selecting the seeds from the largest, most tasty corn to plant for the next generation. Over time corn was developed into what we see today.

I don't agree with this "resistance" type of breeding because it encourages herbicide overuse. However, I do believe plant breeders should be somehow protected from outright commercial piracy since they invest millions into development. Without protection, someone will simply steal their work and undercut them each time. If the court allowed this, the plant breeding industry would be dead: “Buy perfect copies of Monsanto's super seeds here. Half price.”

18 posted on 05/13/2013 12:13:39 PM PDT by varyouga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: varyouga
Wow - a voice of reason in a lynch mob!

Bravo to you but as for me I would run from these foam-mouthed botanist wanna-bees.

19 posted on 05/13/2013 12:30:53 PM PDT by corkoman (Release the Palin!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

GMO soybean seeds don’t “destroy all others”. Soybeans don’t cross pollinate, which is why it’s so easy for Monsanto to prove when its seed stock has been pirated.


20 posted on 05/13/2013 12:45:34 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky
GMO soybean seeds don’t “destroy all others”. Soybeans don’t cross pollinate, which is why it’s so easy for Monsanto to prove when its seed stock has been pirated.

Except the high seas were not involved, therefore there was no piracy... furthermore, the farmer clearly made a legal purchase [from the storage-facility*]... to call these 'piracy' or 'theft' is to advocate the wholesale destruction of all property-rights: in particular there could be no legitimate re-selling of 'used' items if the company prohibited it.

* -- It does not matter that the other purchasers of this seed "normally use it as feed".

21 posted on 05/13/2013 1:05:14 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum; blam; goodwithagun; surroundedbyblue; svcw

22 posted on 05/13/2013 1:18:26 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

Relax. We still operate in a free market. If farmer’s don’t want Monsanto seed, they can use other seed. Stealing is not a conservative value, and that is what this farmer wanted to do. Monsanto-hate is populist nonsense.


23 posted on 05/13/2013 1:22:05 PM PDT by LibertyJihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

There is no conclusive proof GMO’s are harmful. There are plenty of studies showing that many of the vilified GMOs are safe. Anti-Monsanto hysteria is grounded in emotion, not science.


24 posted on 05/13/2013 1:23:51 PM PDT by LibertyJihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Double Tap

Thank you for your reasoned response. It worries me that anti-science, anti-capitalist sentiment is running rampant on FR. Too many people are reading and believing the hysterical Facebook posts regarding Monsanto.


25 posted on 05/13/2013 1:25:16 PM PDT by LibertyJihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
By that logic, copyright laws wouldn't prevent the unlimited reproduction of books or movies so long as one copy of the work had been legally purchased...and, yes, the use to which the seed is put does make a difference.

This farmer knew that the seed he purchased was subject to a plant patent; that's the reason he purchased it; so he could avoid the cost of buying it legitimately.

26 posted on 05/13/2013 1:27:34 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: LibertyJihad

I never thought they were unsafe. My concern is quality .


27 posted on 05/13/2013 1:54:55 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

But he said hard times forced him to purchase a cheaper mixture of seeds from a grain elevator starting in 1999, which he used for his second planting.

The mixture included Roundup Ready soybeans, which Bowman was able to isolate and replant from 2000 to 2007.
****************************************
Nothing in the story tells me that the seeds he bought from the grain elevator were Monsanto product (other than the unsubstantiated allegation that it “contained” the seeds) ,, only that they had the same characteristics , they weren’t sold by Monsanto or labeled as Monsanto seeds ... they were sold as generic soybeans ... that he took the ones that survived “roundup” and grew them for future seeds/plantings sounds 100% OK to me.


28 posted on 05/13/2013 2:15:42 PM PDT by Neidermeyer (I used to be disgusted , now I try to be amused.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
his crops were contaminated by pollen in the wind or on insects,then that seed should be allowed. Even though the new DNA appears in the seed.

Happening in most fields next to GMO fields and Monsanto demands payment for the seeds.

29 posted on 05/13/2013 2:19:16 PM PDT by svcw (If you are dead when your heart stops, why aren't you alive when it starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer
He knew that they were Monsanto seeds.

Virtually all soybeans raised for domestic crushing contain either the Monsanto patented trait or the Bayer patented trait. If the farmer didn't know which beans he had purchased, he wouldn't know which herbicide to apply. If he had applied the wrong herbicide, he would have killed all beans which didn't carry the patented trait.

30 posted on 05/13/2013 2:37:57 PM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: varyouga
"Humans kept selecting the seeds from the largest, most tasty corn to plant for the next generation."

Yup. I read recently that if we started now, using that technique, we could have a decent tasting tomato again in about 100 years.

31 posted on 05/13/2013 2:39:51 PM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

It started with Kellogs and Post and the food pyramid, telling us that 80% of our diet should be grains (carbs).

The food pyramid has been turned upside down, we now know that our diet should only be about 10% carbs.

This was taught to us by our schools, under Jimmy Carter.

The food pyramid was a scam, and those companies made so much money, it would make Bill Gates look foolish.


32 posted on 05/13/2013 2:40:38 PM PDT by esoxmagnum (The rats have been trained to pull the D voting lever to get their little food pellet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: blam

My apologies if this is a duplicate post of sorts...Link to the decision here:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-796_c07d.pdf

“It sells the seeds subject to a licensing agreement that permits farmers to plant the purchased seed in one, and only one, growing season. Growers may consume or sell the resulting crops, but may not save any of the harvested soy-beans for replanting. Petitioner Bowman purchased Roundup Ready soybean seed for his first crop of each growing season from a company associated with Monsanto and followed the terms of the licensing agreement. But to reduce costs for his riskier late-season planting, Bowman purchased soybeans intended for consumption from a grain elevator; planted them; treated the plants with glyphosate, killing all plants without the Roundup Ready trait; harvested the resulting soybeans that contained that trait;and saved some of these harvest-ed seeds to use in his late-season planting the next season.”


33 posted on 05/13/2013 2:52:40 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (Liberals are like locusts...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

There is no evidence they are harmful either


34 posted on 05/13/2013 2:57:52 PM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 .....History is a process, not an event)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: svcw
"Happening in most fields next to GMO fields and Monsanto demands payment for the seeds."

If they can't sell their seed, the farmers should be able to sue Monsanto for the value of their seed business.

35 posted on 05/13/2013 3:11:01 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
There was a recent article claiming Roundup is responsible for a host of diseases. natural news: Roundup herbicide causes smorgasbord of fatal diseases
36 posted on 05/13/2013 3:14:15 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Piranha

If gmo seeds invade your land (the situation here), you should own them or sue them for contaminating your land with their seed.


37 posted on 05/13/2013 6:46:14 PM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: svcw

“If you control the oil you control the country; if you control food, you control the population.” ~Henry Kissenger


38 posted on 05/13/2013 8:58:05 PM PDT by Rodamala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky
By that logic, copyright laws wouldn't prevent the unlimited reproduction of books or movies so long as one copy of the work had been legally purchased...

No there's a huge difference: plants by their nature reproduce themselves, books do not.

and, yes, the use to which the seed is put does make a difference.

Only if that use is bound (conditional) by contract... otherwise you could say that you would not sell me Diesel because I was going to use it to wash my dirty oily hands rather than burn it in my car.

This farmer knew that the seed he purchased was subject to a plant patent; that's the reason he purchased it; so he could avoid the cost of buying it legitimately.

Again, that's irrelevant -- he stole nothing, he bought the seed legally -- your view of patents would mean that someone buying a used computer that someone had not wiped with, say, a full version of PhotoShop installed is theft because it uses proprietary/patented algorithms*.

* - Algorithm patents are, by their nature, absurd -- especially with the amount of abstraction allowed in descriptions. Patenting "'f(x) = X^y + C' where y is some number and C is a constant" makes as much sense.

39 posted on 05/13/2013 11:29:48 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
Fortunately, the US has ignored demands for state ownership of intellectual property. If this farmer didn't want to observe Monsanto's patent, he shouldn't have purchased Monsanto seed.

In truth, Monsanto developed a seed/herbicide relationship which was quantitatively superior to anything on the market at the time it was introduced. Within a matter of a couple of years, virtually all soybeans sold into the domestic market were planted with the Monsanto patented trait. Monsanto spent a boatload of time and capital developing this seed in the reasonable expectation that their intellectual property would not be seized without compensation.

By the way, the Monsanto patented trait will no more spontaneously reproduce in a neighboring field than the alphabet will spontaneously reproduce King Lear.

40 posted on 05/14/2013 6:45:33 AM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky

Yeah , I understand that ... the farmer is OK in my book , the elevator that sold the seeds knowing they were Monsanto should have been the ones sued ... the farmer merely tested the plants for resistance and let the ones that survived go to seed... Allowing living things to be patented leads to this type of lunacy... As others have noted Monsanto didn’t “create” this strain ,, they discovered it by testing thousands of plants and letting the resistant ones go to seed ... exactly what the farmer did.


41 posted on 05/14/2013 4:09:10 PM PDT by Neidermeyer (I used to be disgusted , now I try to be amused.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer
The farmer didn't "test" the seeds to see which ones were resistant. He had to know what resistance(s) the seed had in order to grow them, otherwise he wouldn't have known which herbicide to use.

As I recall from my college days, computer programming involves nothing more than lining up +'s and -'s in the correct order. Microsoft didn't invent +'s and -'s, yet no one seriously argues that +'s and -'s would, somehow have naturally evolved into Windows. The Monsanto patented trait (or the Bayer patented trait) was no more likely to have naturally evolved than Windows.

42 posted on 05/15/2013 6:43:09 AM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

The Monsanto patent attaches to the product. It does not expire simply because the product was subsequently resold to a third party. Suppose I buy a copy of a movie and resell it to you. Does the copyright expire with the first resale, allowing you to make unlimited copies for commercial resale? Of course not.


43 posted on 06/11/2013 6:47:43 AM PDT by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: surroundedbyblue

What makes you think Monsanto controls the world’s seed supply? You need to get out more. Farmers have many choices, including many non-GM varieties. Like all the other companies in the business, Monsanto produces what it thinks farmers will want to buy.


44 posted on 06/11/2013 6:52:17 AM PDT by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sphinx

Does the copyright expire with the first resale, allowing you to make unlimited copies for commercial resale? Of course not.
**********************************
Does that DVD self replicate or would I have to do something to make that copy?


45 posted on 06/11/2013 1:43:52 PM PDT by Neidermeyer (I used to be disgusted , now I try to be amused.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson