5 ms·

This is totally awesome. I would love to see these in person. However, the one thing I really don’t like is this: >Our Firefly Petunias are protected under pa

by Dig1t 3y ago

This is totally awesome. I would love to see these in person. However, the one thing I really don’t like is this: >Our Firefly Petunias are protected under patent, and as such, propagation and breeding are not permitted. These petunias are sold exclusively for personal use. I think this is wrong, it should not be possible to patent life forms.

Mistletoe 3y ago
Luckily it is quite easy to clone plants! https://www.flowerpatchfarmhouse.com/grow-petunias-from-cuttings/ https://www.flowerpatchfarmhouse.com/grow-petunias-from-cutt... I'm sure they will go after stores that sell them but for the home grower, buy one and clone away.
charliebwrites 3y ago
On the other hand “Pirating bioluminescent flowers” sounds metal as hell
throwawaymaths 3y ago
Technically (in the US) it's only possible to patent plants and I think legally yeasts are considered plants. This is "to promote progress in the science and useful art of agronomy". Not defending it, just stating what the law is.
- whatshisface 3y ago
  I initially reacted to it negatively, but on thinking about it I realize that glowing plants are about as natural as polyethylene factories, so I get the logic behind the patentability, and can even see some benefits. Hopefully the patent will reduce the total number of these abominations grown.
  - throwawaymaths 3y ago
    Well where on that spectrum does honeycrisp apple or Maui gold pineapple belong?
    - whatshisface 3y ago
      Somewhere in the middle. Honeycrisp apples are a combination of naturally occurring genes, but they are propagated clonally and in fact cannot reproduce true to themselves. They'd never have arisen without careful cultivation, and (this part is important) another group crossing the same original cultivars as the developers of the honeycrisp used wouldn't get the same apple. So it's a combination that is unique to its inventors, rather than a patent on something anybody could do - and nobody will infringe by accident. An example of a bad patent would be a patent on a process anybody trying to solve the problem would come up with - that's a needless restraint on trade - and an example of a truly horrible patent would be one on a human gene. Those existed until 2013, when the supreme court finally ruled against them.
      - throwawaymaths 3y ago
        Seems arbitrary and liable to abuse due to the patent office gonna call it obvious to deny you the patent because the officer's friend has a similar patent.
        whatshisface 3y ago
        The rule against a trivial invention already exists, but as you suggest, interpretation creates a huge amount of criticism for the patent system.
      - mnw21cam 3y ago
        What you have just said about the Honeycrisp apple is true about all apples. That's how apple varieties have been created since the dawn of time. There's nothing special about Honeycrisp - they basically tried planting loads of seeds after crossing various trees with each other, did a massive taste testing and picked the resulting tree that won the lottery. Then that single tree was propagated by cuttings to make every single Honeycrisp apple tree in existence. But that's how all apple varieties are made.
        throwawaymaths 3y ago
- nottorp 3y ago
  Order one glowing petunia. Plant a cutting in the neighbor's yard. Neighbor goes to jail. Profit!
Aurornis 3y ago
> I think this is wrong, it should not be possible to patent life forms. Consider that if they couldn’t protect their work, they never would have invested the money into making these and offering them for sale to begin with. I understand why some might find it unpleasant, but the fact that these exist at all is a testament to why such protections are available.
- KerrAvon 3y ago
  It’s not, though. There is a perfectly viable market of seeds and such for non-biolumenescent plants. You can, in fact, plant watermelon seeds and use the seeds in the resulting watermelon to plant more watermelon plants. Crazy.
  - Aurornis 3y ago
    > There is a perfectly viable market of seeds and such for non-biolumenescent plants. I don’t understand what you’re trying to argue, but the patent laws aren’t designed to patent generic, pre-existing plants like generic watermelon.
  - pests 3y ago
    How is that crazy? That's how plants work. This is not a natural plant though.
  - shellfishgene 3y ago
    That's not really true for most popular high-performance varieties, most are hybrids and growing them from the harvested seed will lose the characteristics. That's why most commercial farmers buy from a supplier every year instead of saving seeds, and that's the reason for a viable market.
    - ryathal 3y ago
      Commercial farmers also sign agreements to not plant harvested seeds. Monsanto has successfully sued several farmers for not complying with that contract.
shellfishgene 3y ago
From the nature article linked above: "When asked whether Light Bio is worried about plant lovers sharing cuttings of the petunia with friends, Sarkisyan says that although the firm owns patents for the technology, it doesn’t plan to crack down aggressively on the behaviour. “The most positive way of dealing with it is to come up with new, better products,” he says."
stubish 3y ago
This is how rose breeders stay in business. They get the rights to profit off their work, time limited rights over the life form they created. Where it gets messy is people copyrighting stuff they didn't develop or breed, just what they happened to discover and analyze first.
zokier 3y ago
Have you heard about Monsanto? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#Legal_affairs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#Legal_affairs Apparently plants have been patented already for nearly a century, I didn't know that: https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2023/august/expanded-intellectual-property-protections-for-crop-seeds-increase-innovation-and-market-power-for-companies/ https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2023/august/expanded-in... But yes, its controversial, and for good reason. But so is most of IP law to some degree.
sampo 3y ago
> it should not be possible to patent life forms If you count plant patents as patents, then almost all commercially used asexually propagated plant cultivars are patented. https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/apply/plant-patent https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/apply/plant-patent

by Dig1t 3y ago

Mistletoe 3y ago

Luckily it is quite easy to clone plants! https://www.flowerpatchfarmhouse.com/grow-petunias-from-cuttings/ https://www.flowerpatchfarmhouse.com/grow-petunias-from-cutt... I'm sure they will go after stores that sell them but for the home grower, buy one and clone away.

charliebwrites 3y ago

On the other hand “Pirating bioluminescent flowers” sounds metal as hell

throwawaymaths 3y ago

Technically (in the US) it's only possible to patent plants and I think legally yeasts are considered plants. This is "to promote progress in the science and useful art of agronomy". Not defending it, just stating what the law is.

whatshisface 3y ago
I initially reacted to it negatively, but on thinking about it I realize that glowing plants are about as natural as polyethylene factories, so I get the logic behind the patentability, and can even see some benefits. Hopefully the patent will reduce the total number of these abominations grown.
- throwawaymaths 3y ago
  Well where on that spectrum does honeycrisp apple or Maui gold pineapple belong?
  - whatshisface 3y ago
    Somewhere in the middle. Honeycrisp apples are a combination of naturally occurring genes, but they are propagated clonally and in fact cannot reproduce true to themselves. They'd never have arisen without careful cultivation, and (this part is important) another group crossing the same original cultivars as the developers of the honeycrisp used wouldn't get the same apple. So it's a combination that is unique to its inventors, rather than a patent on something anybody could do - and nobody will infringe by accident. An example of a bad patent would be a patent on a process anybody trying to solve the problem would come up with - that's a needless restraint on trade - and an example of a truly horrible patent would be one on a human gene. Those existed until 2013, when the supreme court finally ruled against them.
    - throwawaymaths 3y ago
      Seems arbitrary and liable to abuse due to the patent office gonna call it obvious to deny you the patent because the officer's friend has a similar patent.
      - whatshisface 3y ago
        The rule against a trivial invention already exists, but as you suggest, interpretation creates a huge amount of criticism for the patent system.
    - mnw21cam 3y ago
      What you have just said about the Honeycrisp apple is true about all apples. That's how apple varieties have been created since the dawn of time. There's nothing special about Honeycrisp - they basically tried planting loads of seeds after crossing various trees with each other, did a massive taste testing and picked the resulting tree that won the lottery. Then that single tree was propagated by cuttings to make every single Honeycrisp apple tree in existence. But that's how all apple varieties are made.
      - throwawaymaths 3y ago
nottorp 3y ago
Order one glowing petunia. Plant a cutting in the neighbor's yard. Neighbor goes to jail. Profit!

Aurornis 3y ago

> I think this is wrong, it should not be possible to patent life forms. Consider that if they couldn’t protect their work, they never would have invested the money into making these and offering them for sale to begin with. I understand why some might find it unpleasant, but the fact that these exist at all is a testament to why such protections are available.

KerrAvon 3y ago
It’s not, though. There is a perfectly viable market of seeds and such for non-biolumenescent plants. You can, in fact, plant watermelon seeds and use the seeds in the resulting watermelon to plant more watermelon plants. Crazy.
- Aurornis 3y ago
  > There is a perfectly viable market of seeds and such for non-biolumenescent plants. I don’t understand what you’re trying to argue, but the patent laws aren’t designed to patent generic, pre-existing plants like generic watermelon.
- pests 3y ago
  How is that crazy? That's how plants work. This is not a natural plant though.
- shellfishgene 3y ago
  That's not really true for most popular high-performance varieties, most are hybrids and growing them from the harvested seed will lose the characteristics. That's why most commercial farmers buy from a supplier every year instead of saving seeds, and that's the reason for a viable market.
  - ryathal 3y ago
    Commercial farmers also sign agreements to not plant harvested seeds. Monsanto has successfully sued several farmers for not complying with that contract.

shellfishgene 3y ago

From the nature article linked above: "When asked whether Light Bio is worried about plant lovers sharing cuttings of the petunia with friends, Sarkisyan says that although the firm owns patents for the technology, it doesn’t plan to crack down aggressively on the behaviour. “The most positive way of dealing with it is to come up with new, better products,” he says."

stubish 3y ago

This is how rose breeders stay in business. They get the rights to profit off their work, time limited rights over the life form they created. Where it gets messy is people copyrighting stuff they didn't develop or breed, just what they happened to discover and analyze first.

zokier 3y ago

Have you heard about Monsanto? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#Legal_affairs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsanto#Legal_affairs Apparently plants have been patented already for nearly a century, I didn't know that: https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2023/august/expanded-intellectual-property-protections-for-crop-seeds-increase-innovation-and-market-power-for-companies/ https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2023/august/expanded-in... But yes, its controversial, and for good reason. But so is most of IP law to some degree.

sampo 3y ago

> it should not be possible to patent life forms If you count plant patents as patents, then almost all commercially used asexually propagated plant cultivars are patented. https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/apply/plant-patent https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/apply/plant-patent