4 ms·

No, those aren't really the major problems that people have with Monsanto. We should start by discussing their lawsuits against farmers because Monsanto grain b

No, those aren't really the major problems that people have with Monsanto. We should start by discussing their lawsuits against farmers because Monsanto grain blew onto their fields and move up from there.

dionidium 15y ago
The most famous such case (and probably the one you're thinking of) is Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser in which the farmer who was sued almost certainly saved and re-used seed, then lied about the accidental nature of the crop's presence on his farm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_Canada_Inc._v._Schmeiser http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_Canada_Inc._v._Schmeis...
tptacek 15y ago
To be fair: farmers weren't simply getting sued for having Roundup-ready crops; they were finding their fields populated with Roundup-ready plants, and then using Roundup on the field. There was an element of getting-something-for-nothing on the farmer's side, too.
- carbocation 15y ago
  I agree with your and dionidium's characterizations. My intent wasn't to paint a one-sided anti-Monsanto picture (although I think I ended up doing that, and alas can't edit my original post at this point), but rather to offer an alternative to temphn's characterization of the public's issues with Monsanto.
- seven_stones 15y ago
  > and then using Roundup on the field. There was an element of getting-something-for-nothing Using RoundUp means more herbicide sales for Monsanto.
  - tptacek 15y ago
    The herbicide isn't what's interesting or valuable.
    - seven_stones 15y ago
      > The herbicide isn't what's interesting or valuable. Headpalm. You DO realize that the point of the gene is to SELL ROUNDUP, right? Not using RoundUp on "RoundUp Ready!" crops kind of defeats the entire purpose. "Sales for Roundup and other glyphosate-based herbicides peaked at about $4 billion in 2008 when the product line generated record gross profit of nearly $2 billion. Roundup-branded glyphosate, commercialized by Monsanto in 1976, is one of the few blockbuster molecules developed by industry since the early 1970s. Methyl-tert butyl ether (MTBE), invented by Arco Chemical in the 1960s and commercialized in 1979, is the only other molecule developed by industry since the 1970s to generate sales of more than $1 billion/year." http://www.chemweek.com/chem_ideas/Rob-Westervelt/Blog-Monsantos-Cash-Cow-Heads-to-Pasture_27080.html http://www.chemweek.com/chem_ideas/Rob-Westervelt/Blog-Monsa...
      - tptacek 15y ago
        The licensing fees we're talking about farmers getting sued over are for the Roundup-ready crops, not the herbicide. The point of the Roundup-ready system is that it allows you to plant crops that aren't killed by Roundup. As someone else noted, you can buy Roundup itself at Wal-mart. I think even a cursory read of the thread would have indicated to a good-faith commenter that I know the basics of the difference between Roundup and the Roundup-ready GMO product.
        seven_stones 15y ago
        > As someone else noted, you can buy Roundup itself at Wal-mart. And who do you think makes money when you do that? Hint: It rhymes with "Monsanto". > that I know the basics of the difference between Roundup and the Roundup-ready GMO product. Not in dispute. Dispute is over your claim of them getting something for "nothing" because they used RoundUp. Monsanto gets paid if they use RoundUp. RoundUp, unlike seeds, doesn't grow itself.

dionidium 15y ago

The most famous such case (and probably the one you're thinking of) is Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser in which the farmer who was sued almost certainly saved and re-used seed, then lied about the accidental nature of the crop's presence on his farm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_Canada_Inc._v._Schmeiser http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto_Canada_Inc._v._Schmeis...

tptacek 15y ago

To be fair: farmers weren't simply getting sued for having Roundup-ready crops; they were finding their fields populated with Roundup-ready plants, and then using Roundup on the field. There was an element of getting-something-for-nothing on the farmer's side, too.

carbocation 15y ago
I agree with your and dionidium's characterizations. My intent wasn't to paint a one-sided anti-Monsanto picture (although I think I ended up doing that, and alas can't edit my original post at this point), but rather to offer an alternative to temphn's characterization of the public's issues with Monsanto.
seven_stones 15y ago
> and then using Roundup on the field. There was an element of getting-something-for-nothing Using RoundUp means more herbicide sales for Monsanto.
- tptacek 15y ago
  The herbicide isn't what's interesting or valuable.
  - seven_stones 15y ago
    > The herbicide isn't what's interesting or valuable. Headpalm. You DO realize that the point of the gene is to SELL ROUNDUP, right? Not using RoundUp on "RoundUp Ready!" crops kind of defeats the entire purpose. "Sales for Roundup and other glyphosate-based herbicides peaked at about $4 billion in 2008 when the product line generated record gross profit of nearly $2 billion. Roundup-branded glyphosate, commercialized by Monsanto in 1976, is one of the few blockbuster molecules developed by industry since the early 1970s. Methyl-tert butyl ether (MTBE), invented by Arco Chemical in the 1960s and commercialized in 1979, is the only other molecule developed by industry since the 1970s to generate sales of more than $1 billion/year." http://www.chemweek.com/chem_ideas/Rob-Westervelt/Blog-Monsantos-Cash-Cow-Heads-to-Pasture_27080.html http://www.chemweek.com/chem_ideas/Rob-Westervelt/Blog-Monsa...
    - tptacek 15y ago
      The licensing fees we're talking about farmers getting sued over are for the Roundup-ready crops, not the herbicide. The point of the Roundup-ready system is that it allows you to plant crops that aren't killed by Roundup. As someone else noted, you can buy Roundup itself at Wal-mart. I think even a cursory read of the thread would have indicated to a good-faith commenter that I know the basics of the difference between Roundup and the Roundup-ready GMO product.
      - seven_stones 15y ago
        > As someone else noted, you can buy Roundup itself at Wal-mart. And who do you think makes money when you do that? Hint: It rhymes with "Monsanto". > that I know the basics of the difference between Roundup and the Roundup-ready GMO product. Not in dispute. Dispute is over your claim of them getting something for "nothing" because they used RoundUp. Monsanto gets paid if they use RoundUp. RoundUp, unlike seeds, doesn't grow itself.