4 ms·

"Solve a wide range of humanitarian problems..." which also has the side effect of them monopolizing developing countries. Don't kid yourself. Their unethical

"Solve a wide range of humanitarian problems..." which also has the side effect of them monopolizing developing countries. Don't kid yourself. Their unethical corporate behavior is well documented. It's companies like them that if they start losing money to organics, then they worm their way in to change the meaning of organic on food labels. It's pathetic and they deserve all the criticism they get.

Blahah 14y ago
Monsanto won't own the next generation of tech - it's being produced by governments, especially in Asia, and by academic and charitable organisations. Most that I know of are working towards free licensing arrangements, whereby they patent the tech and allow free use for individuals and small companies. I'm not defending Monsanto - I'm saying GM is not Monsanto.
- CaptainZapp 14y ago
  If Monsanto doesn't own the next generation of such tech I can assure you that they will sue the living bejeezus out of anybody who owns it, or uses it. It's part of their corporate DNA.
  - Blahah 14y ago
    That doesn't make any sense. Monsanto owns patents in a very restricted area of plant transformation. They aren't going to just sue people owning a completely different technology, as they would have zero chance of winning, and a very high chance of pissing off the governments and (perhaps more scary) the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, who funded the next-gen tech.
    - lazyjones 14y ago
      > Monsanto owns patents in a very restricted area of plant transformation. They aren't going to just sue people owning a completely different technology They are already suing people who are not applying any plant transformation, just using seeds. They are even suing people who never used their seeds, but got affected by cross-pollination (http://www.rodale.com/research-feed/organic-vs-monsanto-organic-farmers-lose-right-protect-crops http://www.rodale.com/research-feed/organic-vs-monsanto-orga...). So who are you to say who they are or aren't going to sue next?
      - penny500 14y ago
        Seriously, what is with the blatantly biased sources? Why not link to a source from an unbiased top IP lawyer or professor instead?
        lazyjones 14y ago
        Who are you to call these sources "blatantly biased" and IP lawyers and professors on the same payroll as you "unbiased"?
        CaptainZapp 14y ago
        I was wondering that too. Specifically since the dude, or dudette, is extremely assertive and even aggressive in demanding sources, while at the same time has not even remotely a source to offer for his / her assertions. The biggest kicker was to demand a source for an opinion I presented. If I wouldn,t be against feeding trolls I would be happy to explain the difference between an assertion of fact and an opinion.
      - Blahah 14y ago
        They sue people who they think infringed their patents. Farmers who deliberately select out the Roundup resistant crops for replanting and/or buy the seeds illegally in contravention of patent law. I've read a lot of Monsanto vs. farmer court summaries, and I've not yet seen one where the farmer was not deliberately infringing. The article you linked to didn't mention any evidence that they have sued farmers who were simply affected by cross-pollination.
        DanBC 14y ago
        ...and Monsanto originally included a "TERMINATOR GENE" which would have solved this problem by making all seed sterile, but this caused a lot of problem among activists.

Blahah 14y ago

Monsanto won't own the next generation of tech - it's being produced by governments, especially in Asia, and by academic and charitable organisations. Most that I know of are working towards free licensing arrangements, whereby they patent the tech and allow free use for individuals and small companies. I'm not defending Monsanto - I'm saying GM is not Monsanto.

CaptainZapp 14y ago
If Monsanto doesn't own the next generation of such tech I can assure you that they will sue the living bejeezus out of anybody who owns it, or uses it. It's part of their corporate DNA.
- Blahah 14y ago
  That doesn't make any sense. Monsanto owns patents in a very restricted area of plant transformation. They aren't going to just sue people owning a completely different technology, as they would have zero chance of winning, and a very high chance of pissing off the governments and (perhaps more scary) the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, who funded the next-gen tech.
  - lazyjones 14y ago
    > Monsanto owns patents in a very restricted area of plant transformation. They aren't going to just sue people owning a completely different technology They are already suing people who are not applying any plant transformation, just using seeds. They are even suing people who never used their seeds, but got affected by cross-pollination (http://www.rodale.com/research-feed/organic-vs-monsanto-organic-farmers-lose-right-protect-crops http://www.rodale.com/research-feed/organic-vs-monsanto-orga...). So who are you to say who they are or aren't going to sue next?
    - penny500 14y ago
      Seriously, what is with the blatantly biased sources? Why not link to a source from an unbiased top IP lawyer or professor instead?
      - lazyjones 14y ago
        Who are you to call these sources "blatantly biased" and IP lawyers and professors on the same payroll as you "unbiased"?
        CaptainZapp 14y ago
        I was wondering that too. Specifically since the dude, or dudette, is extremely assertive and even aggressive in demanding sources, while at the same time has not even remotely a source to offer for his / her assertions. The biggest kicker was to demand a source for an opinion I presented. If I wouldn,t be against feeding trolls I would be happy to explain the difference between an assertion of fact and an opinion.
    - Blahah 14y ago
      They sue people who they think infringed their patents. Farmers who deliberately select out the Roundup resistant crops for replanting and/or buy the seeds illegally in contravention of patent law. I've read a lot of Monsanto vs. farmer court summaries, and I've not yet seen one where the farmer was not deliberately infringing. The article you linked to didn't mention any evidence that they have sued farmers who were simply affected by cross-pollination.
      - DanBC 14y ago
        ...and Monsanto originally included a "TERMINATOR GENE" which would have solved this problem by making all seed sterile, but this caused a lot of problem among activists.