4 ms·
Yes, but fwiw: > A recommendation was made that golden rice be distributed free to subsistence farmers. Free licenses for developing countries were granted qui
by knodi123 2y ago
Yes, but fwiw:
> A recommendation was made that golden rice be distributed free to subsistence farmers. Free licenses for developing countries were granted quickly due to the positive publicity that golden rice received, particularly in Time magazine in July 2000. Monsanto Company was one of the companies to grant free licences for related patents owned by the company. The cutoff between humanitarian and commercial use was set at US$10,000. Therefore, as long as a farmer or subsequent user of golden rice genetics would not make more than $10,000 per year, no royalties would need to be paid. In addition, farmers would be permitted to keep and replant seed.
- dudeinjapan 2y agoAlso any patents expire in 20 years, and most are approaching their EOL.
- makomk 2y agoThe original 20-year-old version of golden rice was unfortunately basically unusable (not enough bioavailable vitamin A even when used as part of a much more balanced diet that was more favorable to vitamin A absorption than that of the people it's actually aimed at and substantial yield reductions). Fixing the yield reductions at least required more modern GM techniques that are likely going to be under patent for a good while.
- nobodyandproud 2y ago> Therefore, as long as a farmer or subsequent user of golden rice genetics would not make more than $10,000 per year, no royalties would need to be paid. In addition, farmers would be permitted to keep and replant seed From a farmer’s point of view, that’s a definite yes.