Thank you, that's interesting and leads to this from the wiki (corresponding to English common law, I think.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost,_mislaid,_and_a

Thank you, that's interesting and leads to this from the wiki (corresponding to English common law, I think.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost,_mislaid,_and_abandoned_property http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost,_mislaid,_and_abandoned_pr... "The rights of a finder of such property are determined in part by the status in which it is found. Because these classifications have developed under the ancient and often archaic common law of England, they turn on nuanced distinctions. The general rule attaching to the three types of property may be summarized as: A finder of property acquires no rights in mislaid property, is entitled to possession of lost property against everyone except the true owner, and is entitled to keep abandoned property.[1] This rule varies by jurisdiction" At any rate, it basically seems to boil down to what I've said, which is that unless there is a specific law in your area stating otherwise, if you lose property, you lost it, and while it may be unethical to not report it, it's generally not illegal. Should it be? In general I'd say no, because off the top of my head, it seems the costs outweigh the benefits. And then we come to how that impacts Monsanto. I'd say if Monsanto can't keep it's seeds out of a silo, that's Monsanto's problem and not one that needs government intervention, which is likely to be massive and onerous to other interests. It's the nature of seeds.