I believe in theory that you can't recreate the hybrid either, there seems
to be a lot of confusion about it but my understanding is:

You can't create a new one, you can't propagate it in any way and you
technically can't sell it. As a hobbyist you probably wouldn't get into
trouble for selling off a couple of divisions but if they wanted to sue you
they could. Also I believe you can't create new hybrids from that plant
either.

People are disputing this but I read a plant label that clearly said you
couldn't do anything with the plant except grow it. It's kind of like
buying Microsoft Windows and not being able to do anything other than use
it..........and you never technically own it, you just pay for a license.


"Al" wrote in message
...
Patented plants protected by a patent/royalty system don't have to be
expensive. Most of them aren't. And they aren't expensive partly because
of the patent and royalty system itself.

The system protects the investment of the hybridizer (maker) of the plant
and it protects the investment of the propagator/cloning company.
Specifically it protects these people from each other and from the
commercial grower who buys the stock material in order to produce a whole
crop of the cloned plant. The patent /royalty system is responsible for
most of those Home Depot and garden center orchids that we love so much.

Most orchid hybridizers can't afford to clone their really nice plants in
numbers so high that everyone who wants one can get one. Imagine the cost
and space required to make and grow 100,000 identical red Phals to
maturity.
Imagine the marketing costs to sell them.

Those hybridizers large enough to afford the costs of growing and
marketing
their own cloned plants patent them in order to protect *this* investment.
Who are they protecting it from? Cloning companies and other large
commercial growers.

Those hybridizers with a nice plant who can't afford to grow and market
100,000 identical plants instead offer it to a company that does the
cloning
and marketing in exchange for a fixed price, a certain number of personal
copies and maybe even for a royalty on each plant the cloning company
sells
to others. Most royalties to the hybridizer are only a couple of cents
per
plant. I can think of two big cloning companies in the United States.
Twyford and Floraculture. It is their sole business to find good plants
and
make a million copies of them to sell to commercial growers. If I make a
nice plant then I want to either sell them the right to copy it or protect
it so they can't. Hopefully my rights of ownership and our laws mean
something to them. But if I don't protect it and I sell them a kiekie, it
is theirs to do with what they want. Or is it? I don't know the answer
to
this sticky little question. I hope we don't kill all the lawyers. I
might
need one.

Anyway, the cloning company will market the clones to commercial growers
who
need material that is proven to meet their contractual obligations with
their customers, like Home Depot, catalog companies, garden centers, etc.
They maintain the plant cells and records of propagation as long as the
line
of cloned cells survives. We are talking 100s of thousands of copies
here.

The commercial growers who supply plants to Garden Centers and catalog
companies buy the cloned stock. The patent and royalty system prevents
them
from buying a few plants and making a 100,000 "free ones". (As if the
expenses involved in making 100,000 plants could be called 'free') You
must
realize that almost all garden plants are produced this way now, not just
orchids. Everything from Tulips to Poinsettias.

The originator of the plant gets paid. The cloning company gets paid, the
commercial grower gets paid and the end buyer gets a quality plant with
proven characteristics at a home depot price. It's an evil system and we
should put our collective foot down.

It is the cloning companies and the middle man growers who are always on
the
lookout for good stock plants to clone. Most of the end growers and big
commercial producers in the industry are visited periodically by observers
who monitor their compliance with the royalty agreements. These are the
people who need to worry about vegetatively propagating stock that is
protected by patents and royalty systems. "Lets see you bought 100,000
'Big Chief' Geranium cuttings from us, how come you have 200,000 on your
benches? Would you like to buy the right to make a 100,000 extra copies
now
or after the lawsuit?"

I don't think there are too many companies that worry about propagation by
end consumers, per se. But then an end consumer is not really going to
clone and market them overtly in numbers too big to ignore, right?

Lets put this parts in capitol letters: If it is protected, I *CAN*
POLLINATE IT but I CAN'T CLONE IT. And lets keep it in perspective, I
can't
stop it from making a keiki which belongs to me if it does so I can sell
it
if I want. Can't I? Drat, are all the lawyers dead already? I have
another question.

Al
PS. I like lawyers. I'm just playing.