3 ms·
I haven't thought about it enough to decide whether I'm for or against patenting genetic modifications. That said, the farmer in this case knew what he was get
by jlarocco 14y ago
I haven't thought about it enough to decide whether I'm for or against patenting genetic modifications.
That said, the farmer in this case knew what he was getting into when he signed up with Monsanto. He obviously supports the concept because he was buying patented, modified seeds from Monsanto. He signed the contract with them, then he broke his end of the deal. It seems like an open and shut case.
- D9u 14y agoHe didn't purchase the offending seeds from Monsanto, so he should not have to pay Monsanto, the people who sold him the contaminated seeds are at fault.
- jlarocco 14y agoBut he signed a contract saying he would only buy the modified seeds from Monsanto and their resellers. He explicitly agreed not to do what he did. If it were a third party farmer who hadn't signed a contract with Monsanto then this case would be completely outrageous. But that's not what happened. I don't think the case is about the seeds as much as everybody has made it out to be. He previously signed a contract limiting the ways he could acquire modified seeds, and he broke the contract.