3 ms·

> 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 fiel

> 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.

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.