3 ms·

I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is the "seed software" as it existed before you is still free for all to use. The software license analogy would be BSD

by cbr 14y ago

I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is the "seed software" as it existed before you is still free for all to use. The software license analogy would be BSD (any non-copyleft license).

pvaldes 14y ago
I wonder... if you simply don't use Roundup, the entire process shouldn't be claimed as fair use?. You are not gaining a profit on the Monsanto work, Those seeds are not provided by Monsanto and as you can not avoid to use genetically contaminated, and identical to other seeds otherwise, you should not face a trial for this.
- bcoates 14y ago
  My understanding is that is exactly how it works in practice. Farmers aren't getting sued for accidentally having a few roundup ready plants in their field; they're getting sued for selecting for roundup ready seeds and then using roundup on their fields. That's what happened in this case: That same year, Bowman applied glyphosate-based herbicide to the fields in which he had planted the commodity seeds to control weeds and to determine whether the plants would exhibit glyphosate resistance. He confirmed that many of the plants were, indeed, resistant. In each subsequent year, from 2000 through 2007, Bowman treated his second- crop with glyphosate-based herbicide. Unlike his first- crop, Bowman saved the seed harvested from his second-crop for replanting additional secondcrops in later years. He also supplemented his secondcrop planting supply with periodic additional purchases of commodity seed from the grain elevator. Bowman did not attempt to hide his activities, and he candidly explained his practices with respect to his second-crop soybeans in various correspondence with Monsanto’s representatives. http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-federal-circuit/1607718.html http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-federal-circuit/1607718.html ("glyphosate" is the active ingredient in roundup, "glyphosate resistance" is the trait developed and patented by Monsanto.)

by cbr 14y ago

I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is the "seed software" as it existed before you is still free for all to use. The software license analogy would be BSD (any non-copyleft license).

pvaldes 14y ago

I wonder... if you simply don't use Roundup, the entire process shouldn't be claimed as fair use?. You are not gaining a profit on the Monsanto work, Those seeds are not provided by Monsanto and as you can not avoid to use genetically contaminated, and identical to other seeds otherwise, you should not face a trial for this.

bcoates 14y ago
My understanding is that is exactly how it works in practice. Farmers aren't getting sued for accidentally having a few roundup ready plants in their field; they're getting sued for selecting for roundup ready seeds and then using roundup on their fields. That's what happened in this case: That same year, Bowman applied glyphosate-based herbicide to the fields in which he had planted the commodity seeds to control weeds and to determine whether the plants would exhibit glyphosate resistance. He confirmed that many of the plants were, indeed, resistant. In each subsequent year, from 2000 through 2007, Bowman treated his second- crop with glyphosate-based herbicide. Unlike his first- crop, Bowman saved the seed harvested from his second-crop for replanting additional secondcrops in later years. He also supplemented his secondcrop planting supply with periodic additional purchases of commodity seed from the grain elevator. Bowman did not attempt to hide his activities, and he candidly explained his practices with respect to his second-crop soybeans in various correspondence with Monsanto’s representatives. http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-federal-circuit/1607718.html http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-federal-circuit/1607718.html ("glyphosate" is the active ingredient in roundup, "glyphosate resistance" is the trait developed and patented by Monsanto.)