4 ms·

Isn' t there another kind of GMO whose sole purpose is IP so farmers can' t reuse seeds from one season to the next ?

ch4s3 5y ago
Well they're in the seed selling business and make seeds that can survive being sprayed with herbicide. Farmers agree not to save the seed when they purchase them. But no one is forcing them to buy those seeds, they could buy different ones and use different and less effective herbicides. The one guy they drug into court was not only saving them, he was reselling them to other farmers which seems like a straightforward violation of the agreement he signed.
- guerrilla 5y ago
  > But no one is forcing them to buy those seeds This isn't true. Those seeds produce fertile plants that reproduce with plants from surrounding farms and farmers are prevented for saving those seeds. I don't know what you mean by "one guy" as they do it all the time in India from what I've read.
  - ch4s3 5y ago
    > Those seeds produce fertile plants that reproduce with plants from surrounding and farmers are prevented for saving those seeds. This isn't true. While they do cross pollinate, farmers aren't being sued for picking up some stray genes, this is a myth.[1][2] They seem like total assholes, but there's no evidence that they're suing people who are accidentally picking up the roundup ready genes. Every case I could find where a farmer claims that, they're able to show that the farmer in question intentionally selected those crops, replanted entire fields with those seeds, and were often selling them to neighbors. > I don't know what you mean by "one guy" I'm referring to the famous case in the US that made it's way into a Netflix documentary. [1] https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/10/18/163034053/top-five-myths-of-genetically-modified-seeds-busted#:~:text=So%20why%20is%20this%20a,GMO%20seeds%20without%20paying%20royalties.&text=But%20as%20far%20as%20I,fields%20simply%20through%20cross%2Dpollination https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/10/18/163034053/to.... [2] https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/06/01/dissecting-claims-about-monsanto-suing-farmers-for-accidentally-planting-patented-seeds/ https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/06/01/dissecting-cla...
    - guerrilla 5y ago
      > Every case I could find where a farmer claims that, they're able to show that the farmer in question intentionally selected those crops, replanted entire fields with those seeds, and were often selling them to neighbors. As I said, there are many cases in India that it seems you're not aware of [1]. Who would have guessed a multinational corporation would win in court against peasants the world over... It's not just Monsanto either [2]. 1. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-monsanto-idUSKCN1P505M https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-monsanto-idUSKCN1P5... 2. https://www.rt.com/news/457812-indian-farmers-pepsico-potatoes/ https://www.rt.com/news/457812-indian-farmers-pepsico-potato...
      - ch4s3 5y ago
        Th first article about India not allowing the seed until after people started buying them on the grey market, after Monsanto withdrew an application over a royalty dispute with the Indian government. Monsanto didn't sue any farmer there. The second article is about farmers intentionally planting the potatoes and refusing to stop as part of a settlement deal that offered them either purchasing contracts or asked them to simply stop. Neither of these is an example of an agro-tech company suing farmers for accidentally growing patented seeds. Did you read the articles?
        guerrilla 5y ago
        > accidentally growing patented seeds First, that's moving the goalpost. Second, "who would have guessed a multinational corporation would win in court against peasants the world over..." You're just repeating their side of the story.
        ch4s3 5y ago
        The whole thing was about who they were actually suing. My original claim was that it’s a myth that they sue people for accidentally planting the seeds. If people choose to illegally buy and plant the patented seeds, then they should expect legal trouble. I’m not actually a fan of these gene patents, but I don’t have a lot of sympathy for people trying to use them on the cheap then pretending to take an anti GMO stance when they get caught.
- johnchristopher 5y ago
  > But no one is forcing them to buy those seeds Oh yes, lobbying, price gouging and all other means to force someone don't exist. Almost Hobson's choice.
  - ch4s3 5y ago
    How do lobbying and price gouging make someone plant a seed in their field?
freshpots 5y ago
Ever pre-GMO farmers preferred buying hybrid seeds over heirloom for their stability and traits. Nothing has changed in this way with GMO's.
beerandt 5y ago
That's a contractual agreement made when buying the seeds.

Well they're in the seed selling business and make seeds that can survive being sprayed with herbicide. Farmers agree not to save the seed when they purchase them. But no one is forcing them to buy those seeds, they could buy different ones and use different and less effective herbicides. The one guy they drug into court was not only saving them, he was reselling them to other farmers which seems like a straightforward violation of the agreement he signed.

guerrilla 5y ago
> But no one is forcing them to buy those seeds This isn't true. Those seeds produce fertile plants that reproduce with plants from surrounding farms and farmers are prevented for saving those seeds. I don't know what you mean by "one guy" as they do it all the time in India from what I've read.
- ch4s3 5y ago
  > Those seeds produce fertile plants that reproduce with plants from surrounding and farmers are prevented for saving those seeds. This isn't true. While they do cross pollinate, farmers aren't being sued for picking up some stray genes, this is a myth.[1][2] They seem like total assholes, but there's no evidence that they're suing people who are accidentally picking up the roundup ready genes. Every case I could find where a farmer claims that, they're able to show that the farmer in question intentionally selected those crops, replanted entire fields with those seeds, and were often selling them to neighbors. > I don't know what you mean by "one guy" I'm referring to the famous case in the US that made it's way into a Netflix documentary. [1] https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/10/18/163034053/top-five-myths-of-genetically-modified-seeds-busted#:~:text=So%20why%20is%20this%20a,GMO%20seeds%20without%20paying%20royalties.&text=But%20as%20far%20as%20I,fields%20simply%20through%20cross%2Dpollination https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/10/18/163034053/to.... [2] https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/06/01/dissecting-claims-about-monsanto-suing-farmers-for-accidentally-planting-patented-seeds/ https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/06/01/dissecting-cla...
  - guerrilla 5y ago
    > Every case I could find where a farmer claims that, they're able to show that the farmer in question intentionally selected those crops, replanted entire fields with those seeds, and were often selling them to neighbors. As I said, there are many cases in India that it seems you're not aware of [1]. Who would have guessed a multinational corporation would win in court against peasants the world over... It's not just Monsanto either [2]. 1. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-monsanto-idUSKCN1P505M https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-monsanto-idUSKCN1P5... 2. https://www.rt.com/news/457812-indian-farmers-pepsico-potatoes/ https://www.rt.com/news/457812-indian-farmers-pepsico-potato...
    - ch4s3 5y ago
      Th first article about India not allowing the seed until after people started buying them on the grey market, after Monsanto withdrew an application over a royalty dispute with the Indian government. Monsanto didn't sue any farmer there. The second article is about farmers intentionally planting the potatoes and refusing to stop as part of a settlement deal that offered them either purchasing contracts or asked them to simply stop. Neither of these is an example of an agro-tech company suing farmers for accidentally growing patented seeds. Did you read the articles?
      - guerrilla 5y ago
        > accidentally growing patented seeds First, that's moving the goalpost. Second, "who would have guessed a multinational corporation would win in court against peasants the world over..." You're just repeating their side of the story.
        ch4s3 5y ago
        The whole thing was about who they were actually suing. My original claim was that it’s a myth that they sue people for accidentally planting the seeds. If people choose to illegally buy and plant the patented seeds, then they should expect legal trouble. I’m not actually a fan of these gene patents, but I don’t have a lot of sympathy for people trying to use them on the cheap then pretending to take an anti GMO stance when they get caught.
johnchristopher 5y ago
> But no one is forcing them to buy those seeds Oh yes, lobbying, price gouging and all other means to force someone don't exist. Almost Hobson's choice.
- ch4s3 5y ago
  How do lobbying and price gouging make someone plant a seed in their field?

freshpots 5y ago

Ever pre-GMO farmers preferred buying hybrid seeds over heirloom for their stability and traits. Nothing has changed in this way with GMO's.

beerandt 5y ago

That's a contractual agreement made when buying the seeds.